So How Did She Do?

[i am SAW]

this thread is about Nancy.

the Nancy from the original went on to become an icon in her own right.

so what did you think of this new Nancy?

i think all the charatcers suck in this movie, none stand out as good.

i found the 2 main characters to be the worst, Freddy and Nancy.

not even comparing them to the original characters, they just flat out suck no matter how you look at it.

this Nancy had 0 emotion. definition of flat cardboard. i know the kids were suppose to be tired, but she was ridiculous. nothing about her screamed strong female character who can take on the big bad villain. the villain wasn't big or bad, but still. i'd hate to see the girls who auditioned and lost to her, imagine how much they must have sucked.

i voted for CRAP.

[Ron]

I didn't mind the chick that played Nancy.

[The Dream Master]

I thought Mara did about as well as she could with the role; maybe I just thought she was cute, but I didn't mind her too much. The character itself was written really blandly though; there really wasn't much difference between her and all of the others.

[The 5th Golden Girl]

She was horrible. They should have killed her and let her boyfriend be the sole survivor. Granted, he wasn't written very well, either, but I was rooting for him moreso than her.

[Westin]

This Nancy was inexpressive and devoid of emotion. At times, it seemed like she didn't care that Freddy was stalking her and her friends. It is not the actress' fault; it is just that her character was meant to be goth and lonely.

In sum, I think Nancy Holbrook is cool and I like her, but she is no Nancy Thompson.

[The Dark Vampire]

TBH I think she was about as useful as an open fire in a heatwave

[Voorheeszilla]

I felt that Rooney could've shown more emotion during the beginning of the film, but overall, I liked her in the role. But the one thing that's certain is she was NOT better than Langenkamp in the role. For me, Heather will always be Nancy.

All in all, I think her performance could've been a lot better (as with others in the cast) if they didn't have a suck ass hack of a director.

[Utellme]

Didnt She fall asllep in this movie ?

[The Dark Vampire]

Didnt She fall asllep in this movie ?
No that was the audience:p

[Utellme]

What can you repeat that i was asleep lol.This movie is so dull its pathetic.

[Bill 1981]

I felt that Rooney could've shown more emotion during the beginning of the film, but overall, I liked her in the role. But the one thing that's certain is she was NOT better than Langenkamp in the role. For me, Heather will always be Nancy.

All in all, I think her performance could've been a lot better (as with others in the cast) if they didn't have a suck ass hack of a director.

Fuckin'-aye right.

V has the right idea. Lock this thread up now.

[Hoody]

Did not like her at all. Just a terrible character. About as useless as a football bat.

[Voorheeszilla]

Haha, I couldn't help but laugh at your comment, Hoody, mainly because of the second sentence.

But, really, when I first saw the movie, I didn't care for her. She kind of grew on me, & really, her performance only really gets interesting during the middle/end of the film. Well, at least for me.

It's kind of like how the actor that played Dean didn't show the proper emotion. And really, in some cases, you can't always blame the actor, unless it's the same problem in every film they're cast in. In this case, the director was terrible. What's funny is how he got mad & went on a rant because of the fact that fans didn't like his directing.

What a joke. He's about as terrible as Rick Rosenthal. Neither should ever be allowed to direct a movie ever again.

[Westin]

But, really, when I first saw the movie, I didn't care for her. She kind of grew on me, & really, her performance only really gets interesting during the middle/end of the film. Well, at least for me.


I really liked her performance in the alternate ending. In fact, I like the alternate ending more than the theatrical one.

[Voorheeszilla]

I actually haven't seen the alternate ending.

[Utellme]

V has the right idea. Lock this thread up now.

I would not lock it up cause its nice to have a little place to take a nap.And as boring as this movie is it will cause drowsiness.

In fact for any threads pertaining to this movie there should be warnings ,side effects ,disclaimers if you will. Im surprised were getting away without any of these cause this is dangerous you could fall asleep at your CPU.

[Westin]

I actually haven't seen the alternate ending.

It is much better than the theatrical ending:

Human Freddy tries to seduce Nancy in bed; however, she manages to pull him out of the dream world. Then she proceeds to beat the hell out of him with a baseball bat while yelling "Look at me; look at what you did to me." Of course, she is alluding to the fact that she became a girl inexpressive and devoid of emotion; who cannot communicate well with others due to what Freddy did to her in the past. Finally, she throws gasoline at Freddy and does to him what Nancy Thompson did to him in the original 1984 movie. She doesn't have the help of Quentin to do any of this; she is the true "heroine" by the end of the film.

There is also an alternate scene that would have worked much, much better in the movie:

Instead of having Freddy kill Nancy's mom, they should have used the hospital scene in which a man severely burned with no references (obviously Freddy in his human form; identified as a John Doe) is in a hospital bed and wakes up angrily. The addition of that scene would have given us fans a dramatic ending that we hadn't had before: An angry human Freddy waking up in a hospital bed in the end of a NOES movie.

[i am SAW]

Alternate Opening & Ending

YRpjBpCWgvc

[The Tall Man]

The version I saw back in January had an ending where Not-Nancy is being carted away in an ambulance and Not-Freddy *sigh* of course turns out to be at the wheel.

Instead of having Freddy kill Nancy's mom, they should have used the hospital scene in which a man severely burned with no references (obviously Freddy in his human form; identified as a John Doe) is in a hospital bed and wakes up angrily. The addition of that scene would have given us fans a dramatic ending that we hadn't had before: An angry human Freddy waking up in a hospital bed in the end of a NOES movie.

Yes, because that's exactly what Nightmare fans are clamoring for... that the whole thing was nothing more than Freddy's dream. Even Talalay had the common sense to drop that when De Luca suggested it in his "Freddy's Dead" script.

Although, that's just inept enough to work for Not-Freddy.

T.M., Esq.

[Westin]

Yes, because that's exactly what Nightmare fans are clamoring for... that the whole thing was nothing more than Freddy's dream. Even Talalay had the common sense to drop that when De Luca suggested it in his "Freddy's Dead" script.

I'm sorry; I did not express my idea clearly:

After he is presumably killed in the real world, his body is found; he is mistaken as a man with no ID and sent to the hospital where he proceeds to wake up in his human form.

That ending would have pleased me.
ADDED:
The version I saw back in January had an ending where Not-Nancy is being carted away in an ambulance and Not-Freddy *sigh* of course turns out to be at the wheel.


Heck, how many endings did they shoot for that movie?

[Dead Cell]

Crap.

This Nancy was boring and ineffectual. I only saw the movie once, but I felt like she was more or less tagging along with everyone else while everyone else tried to figure out what was going on. Whether it was Not-Rod or Not-Glen, Not-Nancy didn't seem to take charge of anything. She doesn't have any fire in her throughout the whole movie, so when she does finally confront Freddy, by walking up to him and yelling, "Fuck you," it just rings so hollow and fake.
In, fact, Not-Nancy reminds me a lot of Lori from FvJ in that respect. Lori was led around nearly the entire movie by everyone else too, until finally she was forced into a confrontation. But at no point did I ever think Lori had a handle on the situation or that she was in any way strong or heroic. She got led around by everyone else until everyone else was dead and it finally came time that she had to fend for herself. Very much in line with Not-Nancy. How suiting then, that Not-Nancy was borrowing lines from Lori. Everyone was upset about that, but it makes so much sense in this context.

I don't blame Rooney Mara for the weak portrayal of Not-Nancy. She, like the rest of the capable cast, worked with what the crap-script gave them and what the director wanted of them. They wanted Nancy to be introverted, a lonely soul, a "goth", emotionless and frail; well that's what Rooney delivered.

Not-Nancy a.k.a. Nancy Holbrook, never developed into the true rival to Freddy that Nancy Thompson did. Holbrook is just another in a long line of people that have beaten Freddy, but only Nancy Thompson could ever be considered his true rival. Dream Master be damned.

[Westin]

It is unfair to compare Nancy Holbrook to Nancy Thompson...

Nancy Thompson is the most "inspiring" of all Elm Street characters, I will put it that way.

She anticipated the entire "nightmare" to which she and her friends were subjected in the very beginning of the story. She was always in charge of the situation, even unconsciously. An example is that she did everything she possibly could to prevent Rod and Glenn from dying. These characters could have survived if Nancy had been taken seriously. In many occasions, she was one step ahead of the enemy, and not one step behind. She did not wait until everybody was dead to fight.

Horror movies have not always been fair in their portrayal of women. It is very common to see feminist groups admonishing horror movies, particularly slashers, due to the fact that they portray women as weak or being inferior, unless, of course, if their sexuality is immaculate. In the case of A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), we have an atypical and innovative situation. Nancy as a character fights back much in the way of a soldier in a war; from my perspective, she inspires women facing life-threatening situations to do the same as her. Her character is vibrant, humane and embodies the power of women.

[Voorheeszilla]

Agreed completely, & that's truly the most enjoyable thing about Nancy's character in the original, & it's one of the many reasons why she's my favorite horror movie heroine of all time. After Tina's death, she really did all that she could to prevent more tragedies, but with her mother lying to her & no one taking her seriously, she couldn't prevent those deaths, no matter how hard she tried. At the end of the day, it's still respectable that she would go to such lengths to protect her friends, & that, even when she was literally running on fumes at the end, she devised a plan to take on Freddy, & caused a lot of damage to him.

Her courage is commendable, & the amount of fight in her is what makes me prefer her over other final girls. Not to mention that, as Robert Englund once said, Heather as Nancy is very much a plausible beauty.

[The Tall Man]

Not only is it fair, it's entirely apt to compare the two Nancys. If they didn't want us to do that, they shouldn't have gave them the same first names.

T.M., Esq.

[Westin]

Not only is it fair, it's entirely apt to compare the two Nancys. If they didn't want us to do that, they shouldn't have gave them the same first names.
T.M., Esq.

This is a largely subjective and personal matter, in my opinion. If comparing Nancy Thompson to Nancy Holbrook is appropriate, then comparing "A Nightmare on Elm Street" (1984) to "A Nightmare on Elm Street" (2010) is also appropriate. This comparison, for me, is obviously unfair because nothing truly compares to the original; it'd be foolish, in my opinion, to think that the remake would be better than the original, let alone have such expectation.

---

On a different note, Nancy Holbrook is not Nancy Thompson, but I like the alternate ending of Nightmare 2010 better because we get to see at least "a little" of Nancy Thompson in Nancy Holbrook.

[Voorheeszilla]

I agree, she seemed more like a true heroine, but at the same time, I did like the fact that in the theatrical ending Quentin was actually trying to help her, & he wasn't just there, like a lot of the guys that appear in horror movies & don't really do anything.

[The Dream Master]

This is a largely subjective and personal matter, in my opinion. If comparing Nancy Thompson to Nancy Holbrook is appropriate, then comparing "A Nightmare on Elm Street" (1984) to "A Nightmare on Elm Street" (2010) is also appropriate. This comparison, for me, is obviously unfair because nothing truly compares to the original; it'd be foolish, in my opinion, to think that the remake would be better than the original, let alone have such expectation.


I'm sorry, but that just feels like such a cop out that just tries to sugar coat how much this remake sucked. If you remake a movie, comparisons to the original are completely valid; maybe they're not altogether necessary in determining if it's a "good" movie overall (plenty of remakes pale in comparison to the original, but are still pretty good). But to say it isn't "fair?" Hardly. It's more than fair, and when someone says otherwise, it just feels like some sort of weird defensive mechanism that's covering up the fact that movie is almost impossible to defend.

[Westin]

If you remake a movie, comparisons to the original are completely valid; maybe they're not altogether necessary in determining if it's a "good" movie overall (plenty of remakes pale in comparison to the original, but are still pretty good). But to say it isn't "fair?" Hardly. It's more than fair, and when someone says otherwise, it just feels like some sort of weird defensive mechanism that's covering up the fact that movie is almost impossible to defend.

Yes, DM, I agree with your statement. Looking back at what I wrote, I must admit that I was wrong and that drawing comparisons between the two movies is fair; not only fair, but unavoidable: people will always compare original movies to remakes. In the case of "A Nightmare on Elm Street," though, because the original is what it is, the comparison, in my opinion, is unnecessary. If people compare the original Nightmare (1984) to the remake, they will dislike the remake, and rightfully so. Personally, I like the remake for what it is, and not for what it tries (or tried) to be. Again, don't listen to me; I watch episodes of Freddy's Nightmares on a regular basis, and love doing so. :X

[The Dark Vampire]

TBH if I had never seen the original NOES or anything Freddy related I would of still walked out of this one thinking it was one of the very worse movies it had ever been my misfortune to watch.

[Westin]

I agree, she seemed more like a true heroine, but at the same time, I did like the fact that in the theatrical ending Quentin was actually trying to help her, & he wasn't just there, like a lot of the guys that appear in horror movies & don't really do anything.

The theatrical ending disappoint me for the reason that Nancy acts so "Lori-like" and her voice is so resonant when she defeats Freddy. Alternate ending is better.

[The Dream Master]

Yes, DM, I agree with your statement. Looking back at what I wrote, I must admit that I was wrong and that drawing comparisons between the two movies is fair; not only fair, but unavoidable: people will always compare original movies to remakes. In the case of "A Nightmare on Elm Street," though, because the original is what it is, the comparison, in my opinion, is unnecessary. If people compare the original Nightmare (1984) to the remake, they will dislike the remake, and rightfully so. Personally, I like the remake for what it is, and not for what it tries (or tried) to be. Again, don't listen to me; I watch episodes of Freddy's Nightmares on a regular basis, and love doing so. :X

Hey, I've watched Freddy's Nightmares more than anyone should, but I keep a perspective about it: most of the episodes are terrible. ;)

But I'm just saying with remakes, it works both ways: failure to compare to the original isn't reason alone to condemn or praise a movie. I think it's very possible for a movie to be a good movie, but possibly a terrible remake. Take Black Christmas (really not the best example, but stick with me): for what it is, it's a fun little slasher movie. It's not great on its own merits, and if you compare it to the original, it looks even worse; but hey, it's kind of fun and I enjoy watching it. But I'd be wrong to say, "well, don't compare it to the original and it's good." That's just not true. Just like I think someone would be wrong if they said "it sucks because it's not as good as the original."

To me, NOES doesn't suck because it doesn't live up to the original (by that logic, all of the sequels besides 3 would be bad). It pretty much fails on its own merits (or lack thereof).

[Dead Cell]

Nancy Thompson is the most "inspiring" of all Elm Street characters, I will put it that way.

She anticipated the entire "nightmare" to which she and her friends were subjected in the very beginning of the story. She was always in charge of the situation, even unconsciously. An example is that she did everything she possibly could to prevent Rod and Glenn from dying. These characters could have survived if Nancy had been taken seriously. In many occasions, she was one step ahead of the enemy, and not one step behind. She did not wait until everybody was dead to fight.

Horror movies have not always been fair in their portrayal of women. It is very common to see feminist groups admonishing horror movies, particularly slashers, due to the fact that they portray women as weak or being inferior, unless, of course, if their sexuality is immaculate. In the case of A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), we have an atypical and innovative situation. Nancy as a character fights back much in the way of a soldier in a war; from my perspective, she inspires women facing life-threatening situations to do the same as her. Her character is vibrant, humane and embodies the power of women.
Wow, nicely said. 100% agreed. :)

[The Tall Man]

I'm sorry, but that just feels like such a cop out that just tries to sugar coat how much this remake sucked. If you remake a movie, comparisons to the original are completely valid; maybe they're not altogether necessary in determining if it's a "good" movie overall (plenty of remakes pale in comparison to the original, but are still pretty good). But to say it isn't "fair?" Hardly. It's more than fair, and when someone says otherwise, it just feels like some sort of weird defensive mechanism that's covering up the fact that movie is almost impossible to defend.
^^^ This, hard.

TBH if I had never seen the original NOES or anything Freddy related I would of still walked out of this one thinking it was one of the very worse movies it had ever been my misfortune to watch.
Cosigned in Fuller n' Form's blood.

Hey, I've watched Freddy's Nightmares more than anyone should, but I keep a perspective about it: most of the episodes are terrible.
I can vouch for this. With the exception of perhaps S-10, DM and I have watched FN episodes far beyond what's reasonable for anyone who ever lived. And all three of us have every episode in the DVD set. Liking or disliking "Freddy's Nightmares" isn't really a qualifier.

T.M., Esq.

[Oxley]

She was horrid. I don't have anything positive to say about her (or most of the cast for that matter). She was stale, not convincing and was far from the heroic Nancy we all know (granted that part isn't entirely her fault). She sucked though, a lot.

[Voorheeszilla]

The theatrical ending disappoint me for the reason that Nancy acts so "Lori-like" and her voice is so resonant when she defeats Freddy. Alternate ending is better.

If by "Lori-like" you mean stating a lame one-liner before killing the villain, that's been going on long before FVJ.

[CrystalLake]

She was boring and had no screen presence whatsoever. She was just there, like any other horror movie fodder. To even compare her to Langenkamp's character is an insult. This was one of the things that bugged me during the movie, her very un-charismatic performance. Apart from that, it was alright.
ADDED:
It is much better than the theatrical ending:

Human Freddy tries to seduce Nancy in bed; however, she manages to pull him out of the dream world. Then she proceeds to beat the hell out of him with a baseball bat while yelling "Look at me; look at what you did to me." Of course, she is alluding to the fact that she became a girl inexpressive and devoid of emotion; who cannot communicate well with others due to what Freddy did to her in the past. Finally, she throws gasoline at Freddy and does to him what Nancy Thompson did to him in the original 1984 movie. She doesn't have the help of Quentin to do any of this; she is the true "heroine" by the end of the film.

There is also an alternate scene that would have worked much, much better in the movie:

Instead of having Freddy kill Nancy's mom, they should have used the hospital scene in which a man severely burned with no references (obviously Freddy in his human form; identified as a John Doe) is in a hospital bed and wakes up angrily. The addition of that scene would have given us fans a dramatic ending that we hadn't had before: An angry human Freddy waking up in a hospital bed in the end of a NOES movie.

This would've been perfect. Were these on the DVD?

[Voorheeszilla]

I suppose if you don't compare her to Langenkamp you may come to like her performance more. Originally, when I saw the remake, I found myself wanting to see more of Kyle's character than her's. You can only really blame the script & directing so much but honestly, I'd like to see how she does in other films to see how much those two played a factor in it.

She was able to emote a bit towards the middle & the end of the film, but I'd like to see her in something where she does so throughout the movie's entirety, not just half of it.

[Rich]

The new Freddy and Nancy were both awesome. I am not going to say they were better or not as good as the original versions of the character because they were portrayed so differently.

[Voorheeszilla]

Yes, they were portrayed differently, but still, I don't see anyone putting Mara over Langenkamp. The original Nancy had charisma, she had strength, & you somehow knew she could handle herself. Hell, in New Nightmare Wes Craven himself even says in the movie that Heather was the one who gave Nancy her strength, & that's totally true. With the new Nancy, it almost seemed like without Quentin she would've been a goner before it even got that far. The alternate ending did show her as a stronger character, but overall, there's just no beating Heather.

[Nancy Thompson]

She was awful but then again almost everyone they had to play the teens was just bad. The Firday the 13th remake IMO had better actors

[Rich]

The Nancy in the remake was clearly a different character then Heather's. The character's last name wasn't even Thompson. So, I don't think you can really compair the two. They just so happened to have the same first name. I think the Nancy actress in the new one did a fine job.

[The Tall Man]

The Nancy in the remake was clearly a different character then Heather's. The character's last name wasn't even Thompson. So, I don't think you can really compair the two. They just so happened to have the same first name. I think the Nancy actress in the new one did a fine job.
Once Again...
I'm sorry, but that just feels like such a cop out that just tries to sugar coat how much this remake sucked. If you remake a movie, comparisons to the original are completely valid; maybe they're not altogether necessary in determining if it's a "good" movie overall (plenty of remakes pale in comparison to the original, but are still pretty good). But to say it isn't "fair?" Hardly. It's more than fair, and when someone says otherwise, it just feels like some sort of weird defensive mechanism that's covering up the fact that movie is almost impossible to defend.
^^^

T.M., Esq.

[Apocalypto]

Yes, they were portrayed differently, but still, I don't see anyone putting Mara over Langenkamp. The original Nancy had charisma, she had strength, & you somehow knew she could handle herself. Hell, in New Nightmare Wes Craven himself even says in the movie that Heather was the one who gave Nancy her strength, & that's totally true. With the new Nancy, it almost seemed like without Quentin she would've been a goner before it even got that far. The alternate ending did show her as a stronger character, but overall, there's just no beating Heather.

For the most part, I agree, but that wasn't because Heather was better, it's because the character was much better written in the original.
I'm looking forward to seeing Mara in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo where she'll get to play a character with a good amount of substance at the script level, which here she really didn't.

The alternate ending was much more effective and the best character driven moment in the film, it's too bad they changed to a generic fight scene.

[Westin]

Although most do not put Mara over Langekamp --and rightfully so-- I really like Mara. Although the script did not help Mara in shining in the role of Nancy, I think that the producers did right in casting her. She appeals to me greatly as an actress that could shine in the role of Nancy if given the right script to work with. I wouldn't mind seeing her return as Nancy in a solid, good, properly directed sequel with minimal errors (if any).

[Rich]

I really liked Mara too. She was a very different Nancy. Her last name wasn't even Thompson. So, she was really a very different character. She was actually more like Alice from Friday the 13th Parts 1 and 2 with those drawings.

[The Dream Master]

Yeah, they were different in the sense that one (Mara's) had nothing resembling characterization or development. All she had to do was look mopey and sad. It's a shame too because that girl is going to be a star--you can tell that just from her limited time in The Social Network. Talk about a waste of talent, but, then again, that's what you can say about the entire production.

[Rich]

I think her portrayal of Nancy was pretty realistic taking everything into consideration: sleep depraived, high school student with a job, getting involved with new boyfriend. Those are all enormous stress factors, and a person in reality may carry themselves the same way.

[The Dream Master]

Take a moment to read the last post and see that I didn't say a single negative thing about Mara's performance. She did the best she could with what she had, which wasn't much. All she was supposed to be was a sleepy-eyed dope who managed to move the plot forward. She's not as much a character as she is a plot device. Lazy.

[Rich]

I get what your saying, I just don't see it that way. She had a solid backstory with Freddy, not remembering what happened when she was a kid because she was Freddy's favorite "play thing."

[The Dream Master]

Yes, but the movie does almost absolutely nothing with that. It's hardly solid. In the original, I feel like I'm watching Nancy fight a damn war, not only against Freddy, but everything else that's happening to her. In the remake, I just see some girl who happened to be molested by some creepy guy and she only exists to take him down in the end. There's no sense of struggle, conflict, or development. Seriously, name one memorable thing Mara gets to do besides re-enact the climax from Freddy vs. Jason?

[Rich]

One of the things that stick out in my mind the most is when Freddy is on top of her and keeps calling her "His little Nancy." This movie was more Freddy's show then Nancy's. What they did with this movie is try to do the same thing with Freddy that they did with Jason a year before and really make the marketable character front and center. To me, I think that's a good idea, because the killers are the characters everyone watches the movies to see anyway.

[The Dream Master]

I rest my case about Nancy being pretty much a vapid character then, if she's only memorable because she's leered at by a goofy-looking Sleepwalker wannabe.

But anyway, how do you reconcile all that with the fact that they were catering to the "harshe and darke" crowd by making Freddy a pedophile? If they're trying to simulatenously make the movie about a marketable character, they were doing it wrong.

Besides, even Freddy managed to be boring. Let that sink in for a second: Platinum Dunes made one of the most interesting horror icons of all time a complete bore with the exception of like 3 lines.

[El Rooto]

Rooney Mara was one of the worst things about the film. I pray she does better in the next remake she's in.

But anyway, how do you reconcile all that with the fact that they were catering to the "harshe and darke" crowd by making Freddy a pedophile? If they're trying to simulatenously make the movie about a marketable character, they were doing it wrong.

Maybe this is for a different thread, but I actually thought the character was robbed of the chance to be anything because it seemed like the filmmakers picked an idea they didn't have the ability or the balls to follow through on. Maybe they figured they had to tread more carefully because they made a touchy subject a pivotal part of his backstory and it made him duller.

[The Dream Master]

I would agree with that 100%; all you heard was about how dark and pedo Haleyz was going to be, and they didn't even come right out and say what he did. And by the end of the movie, he basically just started repeating jokey dialogue that Englund made famous in the first place The Dunes didn't know what the fuck they were doing with that character.

[Rich]

The only line he repeated was "How's this for a wet dream."

[The Dream Master]

Yes, and it was by far the best line he had in the whole movie.

[Rich]

I beg to differ. I don't think that line even belonged in the movie. It was out of place and out of context to the scene it was in.

"Three...two...one...Ready or not, here I come"

"The brain lives for seven minutes after the heart stops beating. We still got five minutes left to play!"

"I was just petting him!"

Those were all great lines. I think Dunes did fine by this character. The later sequels focused on the humor aspect of the character and kind of forgot that he was actually a horror character. This one did the exact opposite. I am cool with that.

[The Dream Master]

Oh really? Freddy wasn't cracking wise 20 minutes into the original Nightmare? He does more humorous/clever/sick shit with Tina than he does in the whole remake.

The line about the dog is the only memorable thing Freddy said in the remake that was original. That's something Freddy should be saying. The wet dream line is the same way...oh, that's right, because it IS something the original Freddy said.

I'm not going to say they got Freddy 100% wrong because they did give him those brief moments...but for the most part, they didn't get him right.

[Rich]

You and I will agree to disagree then. I think they did totally get Freddy right, especially the truely evil aspect of the character. They gave the funny stuff a break for this film and just tried to be scary, and take the character series. I think that is a good thing.

[The Dark Vampire]

I'm not going to say they got Freddy 100% wrong

I have to agree with this they only got him 99.99% wrong

[The Tall Man]

I have to agree with this they only got him 99.99% wrong
Quoted for troof. By and large, they did get his wardrobe right.

God those lines SUCKED.

T.M., Esq.

[NancyThompsonOfElmSt]

At first, I hated her with an immense passion. She was dull, needy, and had some pretty bad dialogue. But as time went on, I began to like her more. Not as a Nancy Thompson but as a different character...who happened to have the first name "Nancy". I usually refer to her as "Holbrook", which I'll admit, is a bit childish...but I'm a huge fan of Nancy Thompson(you'd have never guessed) and Holbrook just didn't fit the bill. Or rather...Mara didn't do it for me. I felt she could have done loads better, unless it was Bayer holding her back. I really enjoy the alternate ending, however, moreso than the theatrical version. It allows Holbrook to kick some butt, and face the man who took away her innocence. It's powerful.

Still, no matter what Holbrook does, or did...she will never beat the butt-kicking Nancy Thompson. :D

[Westin]

Yay, more Nancy fans on the board. :D

[NancyThompsonOfElmSt]

Yay, more Nancy fans on the board. :D

GAH! YES! She's my favorite ever! I adore her. I;m a superduper fan :D

[The Tall Man]

Bayer probably has his share of the blame, but the majority of the blame in Rooney's performance has to go to the insultingly appalling screenplay. DM has previously detailed the character as written's shortcomings.

T.M., Esq.

[NancyThompsonOfElmSt]

I'm indifferent about a sequel to the PD film after how the 1st one went down...they usually get worse after that...

[The Dark Vampire]

I'm indifferent about a sequel to the PD film after how the 1st one went down...they usually get worse after that...

It couldn't get any worse they could just show the Freddy Test card (what Spencer saw in Freddy's Dead)for 2 hours and it would be better than the 1st one

[NancyThompsonOfElmSt]

It couldn't get any worse they could just show the Freddy Test card (what Spencer saw in Freddy's Dead)for 2 hours and it would be better than the 1st one

:eek:.....:lmao::lmao::lmao:

[The Tall Man]

The man speaks the truth. :)

T.M., Esq.

[annericelover]

I am not a fan of Nancy Halbrook, it has nothing to do with my love for Nancy Thompson, its just that her character was very weak and dull. I mean what I see is that her character was traumatized at a young age so much that she locked out her memory of what had happened to her. However, why than does she act the exact same way after she begins to remember? Also Quint's character, which we all know has a bit of Glenn mixed in there is the most capable of all the characters, he's the one who fights Freddy, he's the one who looks things up, trying to figure out what they can do and he's the one who ultimately saves Nancy from her sleep(as she was so much sleep deprived she wouldn't be able to scream and wake up). I just could never get into her character, I don't know why, NancyThompsonOfElmSt you are definitely more forgiving than me on this one. But you know I haven't compared the original series to this, just like with the F13 films, Halloween films or comparing the different Joker's.

[Westin]

I would like either a sequel to the remake or a new remake.

"A Nightmare on Elm Street" is too much of an awesome series to end with the 2010 remake. The character (of Freddy) is so popular. The most classic character of the modern horror genre, in my opinion. I would hate, absolutely hate, if they stopped making new movies either because the 2010 remake is not approved by fans or because WB wants to stop investing in the franchise. ANOES is a fantastic series. With today's technology, it is possible to add so much to the movies. Just think of the numerous ways of visualizing and exploring the dreamscape!

In sum, the challenge is to make better movies, with better storylines, developed characters, and fantastic visuals. A critic wrote that the main problem with the remake is that it presented old material that actually worked better in the past (as seen in the movies made in the 80's). I could not agree more.

[The Tall Man]

I would hate, absolutely hate, if they stopped making new movies either because the 2010 remake is not approved by fans or because WB wants to stop investing in the franchise.
Neither of those reasons is why WB isn't doing another Not-Nightmare... it's because the first film did poorly.

With today's technology, it is possible to add so much to the movies. Just think of the numerous ways of visualizing and exploring the dreamscape!
I would agree with that... if Wes Craven wasn't doing the effects better with 10-dollar gags than million-dollar CGI tricks.

In sum, the challenge is to make better movies, with better storylines, developed characters, and fantastic visuals.
In sum, Hollywood does not nor will step up to that challenge. They will make vapid, lazy product because they know it will sell. They don't give a shit about the movie. They just want your moolah. How do you stop this? Well you do what audiences did for Not-Nightmare... stop paying to see it.

T.M., Esq.

[Westin]

In sum, Hollywood does not nor will step up to that challenge. They will make vapid, lazy product because they know it will sell.

I think that a movie with a budget of 35 milion does fall under the category of "lazy product." They did put a lot of effort into this movie, otherwise it would not have cost so much.

Was the movie poorly executed? Yeah. Is it a lazy product? Not necessarily.

With the budget they had, they could easily have made an epic movie, though. :cry:

[NancyThompsonOfElmSt]

I am surprisingly forgiving. Perhaps I'm in denial. i just try giving her a chance. I'm trying, I really am. I have some good internet pals that cosplay Holbrook, so I want to give Holbrook SOME sort of chance.

I just hate PD. Everything about them. Greedy, greasy, money loving buffoons! Sam Bayer needs to be punched. I pray I can do it some day. ;)

Oh. another remake! haha I'm in on that idea. I think, a new company needs the rights. Then they can just go in a totally DIFFERENT direction. Ditch Holbrook and Quentin, and run with something totally new and original.

[The Tall Man]

I think, a new company needs the rights.
I can roll with that... In fact, you know who needs to own the rights to "A Nightmare on Elm Street"?

Unique Pictures. :sniffle:

T.M., Esq.

[Voorheeszilla]

That could work. Would be a thousand times better than continuing to be in Dunes hands.

[Rich]

I think that Warner could do one of three things. Perhaps they should do all three! :D

A. Produce an in house film that takes place after Freddy vs. Jason with only the Freddy character played by Robert Englund.

B. Produce an in house Freddy vs. Jason 2 staring Robert and Kane (damnit!).

C. Hire Twisted Pictures to produce a sequel to the 2010 remake with Jackie and Rooney.

I actually wouldn't mind if they did all three. :shy:

[The Dream Master]

The most likely choice is D.) None of the above.

[Deathscythe]

Maybe Warner should reboot the MK film franchise and have Freddy in it....

....or not.

[i am SAW]

http://www.dreadcentral.com/news/49589/rooney-mara-girl-freddy-tattoo-has-harsh-words-elm-street-stint

We'll be the first to admit that after seeing the abysmal remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street, we didn't think there was any way that Rooney Mara could pull off playing the complex role of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo's Lisbeth Salander. Guess who else wasn't a big fan of the movie or the role of Nancy? Mara herself.

Mara recently sat down with Entertainment Weekly and dropped the following comments about her part in Samuel Bayer's travesty of a flick:

"You kind of learn to self-sabotage with things you don't want to get," she tells EW. "Sometimes you don't want to get something, but you do a really good job and you get it anyway. That's kind of [what happened] with A Nightmare on Elm Street-I didn't really even want it. And then I went in [to audition], and I was like, 'Fuck. I definitely got that.'"

So how did she feel post-Elm Street?

"I didn't want to act anymore," Mara continues. "I was like, this isn't what I signed up for. If this is what my opportunities are going to be like, then I'm not that interested in acting. So I was very discouraged and disheartened. And then I got the Social Network script. That kind of re-inspired me."

While we totally get where she's coming from in terms of how wretched the remake of the Wes Craven classic was, let's no forget this is the same chick who played Classroom Girl #1 in Urban Legends: Bloody Mary. Maybe she's prouder of that role than her one from Elm Street? Then again, yeah, we probably would be, too.

In other related news Samuel Bayer hasn't worked since. Sometimes justice is sweet.

wtf? so her acting sucked... on purpose?

"i don't want this role, but i got it, so fuck it i'll do it"

"welcome to my world Freddy, YAWN!"

[The Dark Vampire]

TBH That's exactly what I said the actors didn't even seem to be trying