Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

UPDATE!! Here's A New Poster For The NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET Remake.!! Now W/ A Review!!

Merrick again... Adding one of the reviews we've recently received for the new NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET movie. This is from a reader called The Anodizer. NOTE: THIS REVIEW IS SPOILER INTENSIVE!! BE WARNED!!

Here Andonizer...
The movie starts off at a diner with a boy at a table trying to stay awake while talking to his girlfriend about his nightmares (The girl is essentially Tina from the OG Nightmare). He falls asleep and Freddy comes in and forces him to slice his on throat with a steak knife in of her. At this point I thought the movie had potential. Next is the funeral where the Tina character (they changed her name to I don’t remember what) realizes from an old picture she sees of her boyfriend that she knew him as a child. She doesn’t remember knowing him before high school so she decides to investigate and then dies next to another boyfriend she has after sex. The exact same way she dies in the original. Then he runs away to find Nancy to tell her about how she died, then gets arrested and is killed in his cell. This is where it gets dull. Turns out Nancy and a handful of other kids there all went to the same pre-school and their parents thought they might have been molested by the gardener who lived in the preschool basement: Fred Krueger. When they talk to their kids about it they’re told about a secret cave Freddy takes them to. On the word of their kids (who are 4 and 5 years old at the time) they hunt Freddy down and throw a lit can of Gas at him and kill him. Now Freddy is after all the kids who went to the Pre-School. By this time there are only 2 kids still alive who had accused Freddy of touching them. Nancy and the Johnny Depp character. They travel to the old abandoned preschool break into Freddy’s old room in the basement. And the big reveal at the end of the movie? You’re going to have to watch the movie to find out............. Just kidding save your money. Turns out he really did molest them... and he’s seeking revenge on all the kids that ratted him out. Nancy falls asleep and grabs him when she is woken up and brings him out of her dreams, then proceeds to beat him with a baseball bat and accidently sets him on fire again. Freddy’s dead and the Johnny Dep character survives with major scars on his chest. At this point everyone in the theater is glad its over... its not. Then presumably weeks later Nancy with her arm in a sling from her battle is talking to her mom when out of nowhere Freddy grabs her mother through a Mirror and slices her head off. Roll Credits. Nothing here worth seeing. They took a good movie and destroyed it. Then made Freddy’s burned face realistic and un scary at the same time. On top of that there was no cameo by Robert England anywhere to be found. One or two decent death scenes outside of that not worth watching. It almost seems like a made for cable movie. The fun Freddy we remember who makes jokes at the expense of his victims is there but only at the last 10 minutes of the movie and by then it was too late. I was really hoping this movie was going to be good. I bet they are going try to make it PG-13 because there wasn’t that much gore or blood, no nudity, and I heard the work “Fuck” only once... so prepare yourself. Call me the Anodizer.
Heard a few more reports like this; hopefully they'll be off-base. We'll see...

Merrick here...
A new poster from Platinum Dunes' NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET remake has debuted on MySpace.
You can see a larger version of the same image HERE. I wish I could say I've heard good things about this film, but...essentially...I'm being told that nearly every mistake we feared they'd make when this project was first announced...was made. Still wanting to see for myself, but...
--- Follow Merrick on Twitter! ---

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:52 a.m. CST

    Every set visit fluff piece doesn't seem to agree Merrick

    by WickedJester

    But I'm fearing you're more right than they are.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:52 a.m. CST


    by thalvar

    Yeah, first time ever being first.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:53 a.m. CST

    Except you're not.

    by WickedJester

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:53 a.m. CST


    by theskypatrol

    well, it definitely doesn't shy away from showing us that Freddy is not Robert Englund no mo.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:53 a.m. CST


    by thalvar

    Nope, I wasn't the first. Oh well... I still want to see this movie.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:55 a.m. CST

    by SonnyBonoWigDo

    "I'm being told that nearly every mistake we feared they'd make when this project was first announced...was made" should this come as a surprise?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:56 a.m. CST

    The Poster

    by Wrath4771

    The movie will suck pickled doo-doo, but I do like the poster.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:56 a.m. CST

    Afraid of this movie....

    by Nuking the Fridge

    Not because it is a scary movie.<p>But because this movie looks dogshit bad. I love the Freddy movies, but this thing I am scared to death of.....<p>I spoke to Robert Englund about it last fall, and he is a good soldier about it, I am convinced he had one more movie in him but they figured he was too old. Plus Hollywood is totally into that whole re-boot/remake thing.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:05 p.m. CST

    What were they thinking?

    by donkey_lasher

    In fact what were they all thinking when they decided to reboot every classic from the 80's?<p> They certainly weren't thinking that they would make a film better than the original that's for sure.<p> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ This looks Night of The Living Dead 1990 bad.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:06 p.m. CST

    Sounds like a par for the course remake.

    by The Reluctant Austinite

    Sounds like it'll fit in just fine with the new "Friday the 13th" and "Texas Chainsaw" re-makes. That's pretty much what I expected.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:07 p.m. CST

    I'm not sure if it's bad that the "fun Freddy" is gone.

    by RedEgiraahgnal

    Because I hated that fucking guy, but still think that Freddy from part 1 is one of the greatest villains ever. But that's all positive i can say about the remake so far (without having seen it.)

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:08 p.m. CST

    And now the review is added.

    by donkey_lasher

    I'm sticking with "Night of The Living Dead 1990" bad.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:09 p.m. CST

    They can't beat the original

    by Sanya08

    I just hate when they messin' with a classic. The original Nightmare is still a great horror movie, and Robert Englund is still a scary mofo. I don't know what they want with the remake. What's the purpose??

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:10 p.m. CST


    by donkey_lasher

    The Fun Freddy was added in later films. Freddie's Nightmares on TV probably started it all off.<p> The Freddie from the first film, and Wes Craven's New Nightmare, is the one I like.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:13 p.m. CST

    I loves that JEH

    by Nadine_Cross

    And that Forest Gump voice in the trailer. Oh, and that awesome hairpiece. That shit's gold.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:16 p.m. CST


    by Foomas

    Wow what a half ass write up......This can not be real right?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:19 p.m. CST

    Those complain of cool articles

    by yourSTEPDADDY

    ...better not ever post FIRST... its 2010, quit that stupid shit and at least ACTUALLY BE FIRST...its even sadder when they say "i never got first"... probably never got head either... and horror movies should be extinct like silent movies

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:21 p.m. CST

    Ian McShane as BLACKBEARD in Pirates 4

    by IAmLegolas

    should be the main news today. Aint' It Slow News.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:26 p.m. CST



    What? Did you work on the film or something? Everything he said sounds like the film I saw.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:26 p.m. CST


    by donkey_lasher

    Shit, that's just made my day.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Drat and Bother

    by blackwood

    JEH is such good casting. I hope I like it more than everyone else who has seen it so far. I doubt I will. What a fucking waste.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:28 p.m. CST

    UltraTron - Inarguably Better Remake

    by blackwood

    The Thing.<p>EAT IT!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:30 p.m. CST

    I liked Fun Freddy

    by tohn007

    Thats what made him stand out from Jason and Michael Myers. He would kill you in cool ways and talk shit while doing it. I liked the films through part 4, which is probably my favorite besides the first one.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:30 p.m. CST

    Well this is no fucking surprise

    by sansara07

    This project has shit storm written all over it from day one. Fuck this shit!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:32 p.m. CST

    Call me the Anodizer.

    by MrDexter

    No—call you Illiterate

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:32 p.m. CST

    Yeah, the Thing remake is pretty perfect

    by Nadine_Cross

    Keith David....sigh.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:34 p.m. CST

    I was looking forward to seeing Haley Joel Osment as Freddy.

    by tonagan

    He's come a long way since... what?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:34 p.m. CST


    by frankenfickle

    "He falls asleep and Freddy comes in and forces him to slice his on throat with a steak knife in of her." what the what? "She doesn’t remember knowing him before high school so she decides to investigate and then dies next to another boyfriend she has after sex." whaaaaat?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:34 p.m. CST

    I'm looking forward more to the new Scream trilogy

    by Bruce of all Trades


  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:38 p.m. CST

    My head hurt from reading that "review."

    by Blue_Demon

    Sounds like this movie's going to suck bad. If I were a 15 year-old girl I might go see it.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:39 p.m. CST


    by ElJirafa

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:41 p.m. CST


    by Nadine_Cross

    The Fly!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:43 p.m. CST

    The Thing isn't a remake, gentlemen.

    by Hint_of_Smegma

    It's a different take on the same short story that The Thing From Another World was based on so using it as an example to show not all remakes are bad is a bit misguided. Despite the negative reactions from when this project was announced I was willing to give it a go - I love Freddy Krueger after all so was hoping for a brutal, refreshing take on my favourite screen villain. I had a sinking feeling when the screenshota were posted this morning -no atmosphere, the kids too generic and good looking, too bright lighting and no blood for evident wounds that'd be pissing it everywhere in real life. Yeah I'm a nerd go sue me. But it just looked like a tame version of the original. Now the review comes in, it's looking worse. Still, Jackie Earle Haley and Clancy Brown in the same movie has to have some merit - I'm hoping this isn't as bad as it's looking like but I think we can safely say it's not going to beat the original.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:45 p.m. CST

    No fucking way. I didn't think you guys would post this

    by D.Vader

    Amazing. You know what also got some early reviews? YOUR HIGHNESS.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:47 p.m. CST

    Fuck Michael Bay


    Its all his fault.... his shitty producing is a farse worse crime then his bullshit directing.... he's produced all the fucking horrible remakes of old classics, like that terrible Friday the 13th. Fuck him, so so hard..... It makes sense that the travesty that has become the horror genre this decade was largely due to the bayster

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:48 p.m. CST

    Horrible Review

    by paradigm26

    This has to be the most comprehension-challenged review I've read here in a long time. I'm going to feign a guess that the only reason this film comes across as half-baked, confusing, uninteresting is that Anodizer's "review" (and I hesitate to call it that) eats it. I'm going to agree with Mr. Dexter in that you, Anodizer, shouldn't be submitting illiterate material.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:49 p.m. CST


    by TehCreepyThinMan

    You know, I’m not against remakes. Three of my most favorite Horror/Scifi movies are remakes, they being Phillip Kaufman’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982) and David Cronenberg’s The Fly (1986). I even have a sfot spot for Chuck Russel’s The Blob (1988) and Tom Savini’s Night of the Living Dead (1990).<br> <br>Now, I have no delusion’s that all of those remakes were done because the Director’s had some sort of burning desire to revisit those stories. Truth be told, they were made for commercial reasons, the same as any remake. But at the very least the filmmakers tried to improve upon the originals even though they might not have completely succeeded.<br> <br>But this Nightmare on Elm Street remake is being shepherded by King of the Hack’s™ Michael Bay who wouldn’t know Horror, or quality for that matter, if it took a dump in his mouth. He keeps hiring these music video/commercial Directing morons who have no interest in even trying to make a decent film. Their only goal is to use the remakes as a stepping stone towards getting bigger assignments. They CONSTANTLY use that annoying MTV editing and lighting style where every shot has either a blue, green or yellow filter over it.<br> <br>Now that’s not to say that there aren’t people in the music video/commercial industry who can make good movies. George A Romero himself started in that field while Ridley Scott and David Fincher have both made the classic Horror films, Alien and Se7en respectively. But Michael Bay isn’t going to hire people who have any real talent. He’s going to hire juvenile morons like himself to churn out this garbage because he knows that the braindead teen mallrats of North America will flock to see this despite the fact that the little retards couldn’t sit through the original Chainsaw Massacre, Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street because of their ADD saturated grey matter. If they had any that is.<br> <br>I myself have no problem with a remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street. I think the concept is strong enough that it would be interesting to see someone else’s take on it and, to be honest, I’m getting tired of Kruger being played as a clown by Englund. So I wasn’t all that sad that they had re-casted the part, especially given that Jackie Earl Haley is doing it. But the fact is that this isn’t being made by, say, David Lynch (who would have been my first choice) but instead by a bunch of pawnbrokers, disguised as moviemakers, reselling old goods with new packaging.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:51 p.m. CST

    Why wouldn't the kids remember?

    by D.Vader

    They all have amnesia? Stupid fucking twist.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Hey friends why not do the right thing and.. NOT BUY A TICKET!

    by D.Vader

    If this sounds shitty to you, then for God's sake, DON'T BUY A TICKET. Wait for the DVD.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:53 p.m. CST

    It was a terrible review

    by Foomas

    It was the way he did the write up. Like it was composed by a child. If it sucks it sucks. Horror movies are long dead. And I could give a shit about a movie that died in the 80's.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:56 p.m. CST

    that is the worst 3rd grade book report

    by I87D

    i've ever read.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:56 p.m. CST

    NO NUDITY?!?!

    by D.Vader

    Then what's the fucking point?!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:56 p.m. CST


    by alan_poon

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 12:59 p.m. CST

    I agree with D. Vader

    by Davidhessstation

    Please people: don't pay for this movie! Please! We need to stop with these remakes and the retards who run Hollywood will keep making them if you all keep paying for them.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1 p.m. CST

    "New Nightmare" ??

    by MR. MURDOCH

    Wes Craven already did a film called "NEW NIGHTMARE" and it was brilliant entry in the series. Way to go, marketing folks! I'm wouldn't be surprised that if this fails, we'll see the studio throwing money in front of Englund to appear one last time in post-postmodern take on the whole thing, written and directed by...Craven. Hey, the Universal Soldier franchise did it, didn't they? ;-)

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:01 p.m. CST


    by TehCreepyThinMan

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:03 p.m. CST

    People complaining about no nudity. . . .

    by KenKRK

    go online and jerk off to porn. Stop complaining about the fact that there's no nudity, especially when the original didn't have nudity!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:03 p.m. CST

    1,2 this movie sunds like poo.

    by alan_poon

    3,4 please don't make no more. 5,6, Michael Bay sucks dicks. 7,8 rather stay home and masturbate. 9,10 Platinum Dunes fucked up again.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:04 p.m. CST

    Andrew Koenig LIVES!!!!!

    by ludmir88

    yeah I know who cares...

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:04 p.m. CST

    anybody ever heard of spell checker...

    by andyny29

    this review needs a typo check also.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:05 p.m. CST

    That review was shit

    by castor778

    I will hold my thoughts until this comes out, but as poorly written as this review was - and acting as though they wanted "fun Freddy" makes me all the more willing to go buy a ticket for it. That and I don't know what to believe as far as the blood and gore is concerned, the set report over on Dark Horizons seems to state otherwise when they mention how graphic one of the kills is.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:06 p.m. CST

    The Thing remake

    by Davidhessstation

    To argue the point that The Thing is a remake so some remakes are good: that movie came out in 1982! It was directed by John Carpenter at his peak! CGI wasn't invented! Of course that remake was good! These remakes now aren't being directed by great genre directors. Alexandre Aja or whatever his name is, is the only one really and his remake of Hills have Eyes is one of the very few good remakes out there that is recent. Rob Zombie's Halloween remake is half a good movie. Maybe if we get great genre directors to do remakes they may work out. But hiring some no talent hack to do Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Friday the 13th is just stupid.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:10 p.m. CST

    New Opening

    by super8rocks

    I saw this at a pre-screening a few months ago and got to stay afterwards with 19 others to tell Michael Bay what we thought. We ALL agreed the opening had to change and judging by this review they actually listened. the version I saw started off with a boring keg party that introduced all the characters and made the movie feel like American Pie. Glad they listened to us there but now I wonder what else they changed that we complained about??? There were quite a few things that didn't work or didn't work unless you saw the original film. one girl didn't get the "pull him outta the dream" scenario since it wasn't explained much at all. In the original thay plan that all Nancy tells Glen all about her plan so there's no misunderstandings. Oh well, seemed like they did at least try and it did looks really good as a film.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:10 p.m. CST


    by TehCreepyThinMan

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:11 p.m. CST

    KenKRK- what's the point of a remake?

    by D.Vader

    You think you can make the first movie better, right? Well you know what'd be better? Nudity. Nudity is what you put into a film that doesn't have good things going for it in the first place. Nudity makes shitty movies more worthwhile. <p> Sounds like nudity would make this film a bit more enjoyable. After all, the sex scene in the Friday the 13th remake was one of the only good things about it, in my opinion.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:11 p.m. CST

    And no offense Merrick...

    by castor778

    But you are to blame for posting this shit. You said "one of the reviews," as in there are more? I have a hard time believing the other reviews were this poorly written. Seriously, if you are going to post reviews on your website, especially for a movie like NOES, you should at least post a coherent one that doesn't come off like it's written from a kid who's balls haven't dropped yet.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:13 p.m. CST

    "... and forces him to slice his on throat with a steak knife in

    by Wirraway

    In our alternate universe where English is spoken, this is supposed to mean????

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:17 p.m. CST

    Merrick.. do the right thing..

    by Sin_Happens

    Take this piece of unintelligle filth off the site.. No seriously I know everyone is game to get in on the whole "I saw this movie before everyone else and here's my review" boat/bandwagon.. If someone is unable to type at the level of at least a 12th grader then seriously dump the review in the trash or use it as toilet paper when you have explosive diarrhea..

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:18 p.m. CST


    by super8rocks

    I just caught a bunch of mistakes in my post as well. This comment box is just too small! I doubt that was his problem but you never know.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:21 p.m. CST

    "Work fuck"?

    by ricarleite2

    Everybody knows that the fuck is a word.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:21 p.m. CST

    Some succesful remakes....

    by Cagliostro

    Uhm...Maltese Falcon, Wizaerd of Oz, Frankenstein, The Fly. I'm sure I can come up with a few more if you'd like.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:23 p.m. CST

    slice his on throat with a steak knife in of her.

    by skimn

    I'm sure thats supposed to read "in FRONT of her".

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:27 p.m. CST

    Horror dead!

    by Foomas

    Now it's just gore gore gore.....I would like it to come back....Things are looking grim grim....ooooo scary!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:30 p.m. CST

    Same point as retelling any story

    by KenKRK

    How many films have been based on Dracula? Not vampires in general, but that particular story by Bram Stoker? Even Nosferatu was remade and is considered a classic. If folks are mad about certain films being remade, that's fine. My issue is when someone throws out, "Duh, there weren't enough titties!!" It makes you sound like an idiot. Especially if the film being remade DIDN'T HAVE NUDITY IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!! Even once you get into later Freddy films, I can only think of one instance of nudity, and that was in Dream Warriors. So, citing that as a flaw against the remake is kind of stupid to be. And believe me, I'm not someone adverse to boobs, but dammit if I don't really get up in arms if they're not featured in a particular slasher film.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:37 p.m. CST

    KenKRK, maybe you misunderstand my point

    by D.Vader

    This remake sounds like shit. <p> The presence of boobs can elevate shit to be *enjoyable* shit. <p> No boos in this just sounds like a missed opportunity to make the film more enjoyable *and* more appealing. Especially to pple who only care about nudity (don't misunderstand me, I'm not one of them, but I certainly see its place in trashy horror).

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:37 p.m. CST

    Oh well, maybe Back to the Future

    by mraig

    the remake (coming to a theater near you summer 2013, directed by Brett Ratner, starring Jack Black as Professor Brown and Shia LeBeouf as Marty McFly) will be good. <P> Also it stars Michael Cera as George McFly and (insert hot new unknown girl who can't act) as Lorraine.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:39 p.m. CST

    I was trying to make it sound terrible

    by mraig

    But Michael Cera as George McFly would not be that bad, if I do say so myself.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:41 p.m. CST

    Maybe Bill Murray as Doc Brown?

    by mraig

    Still a terrible idea though.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:49 p.m. CST


    by KHjLL

    I can't wait...I hope they stay true to the original and add to it...kind off got teary Eyed seeing the poster for some reason...when I grew up I always thought I would work on the NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET set... and FRIDAY the 13th set...

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Let's be honest. . .

    by KenKRK

    no matter what direction this remake was taking, most of you would write it off, because you've hardwired your brains to say "Remake? Oh, it's gonna suck!" Your point about nudity is still from a juvenile viewpoint of "Duh, needs more titties!" even if you claim to not be one of those people who will enjoy a movie more if nudity is included.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:53 p.m. CST


    by WickedJester

    Was there another test-screening recently?<br><Br>Sounds like everything I've read/heard too. What a shame.<br><br>Probably would've been a better idea if he DIDN'T molest them. Makes it much more interesting because then the kids really did create him.<br><Br>But they took the safe, paint by numbers approach it seems. It'll make a ton of $, even more on UNRATED FEDORA EDITION DVD that'll follow.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:54 p.m. CST

    This reviewer sounds like he "USED TO SMARTER"!!!

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    *** That one is for all you old-school Talkbackers out there ***

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:56 p.m. CST


    by Sin_Happens

    Remakes don't always suck but how Hollywood has come to bastardize everything now with no class or true skill is why they have come to suck so much. And I willa gree every R rated horror flick should have T&A in it.. Why? Because that how it was done in the 70's and 80's.. Nudity is part of horror because it is fun and you can claim "juvenile" but realistically if it helps the core plot which nowadays is so overdone and rehashed it is better than nothing.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:56 p.m. CST

    well it seems one more movie to add in my

    by ominus

    for download list.oh well.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Platinum Dunes: Why so basement?

    by Dr. Samuel Loomis

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Like it or Love it or Hate it....but see it

    by Cavendish82

    Boycotting films cos of internet whispers, illiterate reviews and simple crazy-talk does nothing except further damage the ailing industry, which leads to many films not getting made in future and also means you cant have a opinion on it at all, at least see it!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:05 p.m. CST

    great review.

    by alice133

    on accord type memory glance of it substantial look also.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:12 p.m. CST

    And with this one they haver ruined every moder Horror icon

    by Stunt_Man_Bob

    Leatherface Jason Meyers and Freddy, Good work guys. Next, Pinhead.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:14 p.m. CST

    I will never watch this film...

    by billyhitchcock1

    ...fuck you Hollywood.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:20 p.m. CST

    Why do I have to keep repeating myself!

    by KenKRK

    I've always said, if the original NOES films didn't need nudity, why is it such a crime that the remake doesn't have any?!? I love boobies, but if they weren't in the original film, I'm not gonna cry foul if the filmmakers choose not to have nudity in the remake! And some of the stuff you claim Hollywood is bastardizing, isn't nearly as great as some of us remember. People bitched about GI Joe and Transformers (although I will agree, the second film was just bad in general) like the source material was pulitzer prize winning or something. And even iin the realm of horror films, it's even worse, 'cause the genre has such a niche audience, and they go apeshits at the slightest mention of one of their beloved horror films being remade. Then some overdramatic prick gets on a soapbox to complain Hollywood doesn't do anything original, it's all just gore, and blah blah blah. then a film will come out, then they're like, there wasn't enough gore, there should be more gore, and titties. People talking about how much the Friday the 13th remake sucked, like ANY of the original films were that much better.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:22 p.m. CST

    Why even remake - just recast and sequelize!

    by TommyGavinsEgo

    Seriously - of all the horror franchises, they remake Friday the 13th and Elm Street? Neither of those had much real internal continuity. Recast if you must and just bring out an "original" new entry... Half the Friday's didn't really explain how Jason was resurrected, he was just "there". And last year's Friday the 13th was less a remake/reboot than Jason's Greatest Hits, Remixed And Reheated... which is pretty much was this sounds like.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:26 p.m. CST

    This is exactly the overdramatic bullshit I'm talking about!

    by KenKRK

    "And with this one they haver ruined every moder Horror icon" Yes, because the remakes erase the memory of the original films! Statements like these are even more hilarious because this person probably made the same declaration when all of these remakes were announced anway, "This is gonna suck!" Then, either paid money to see it, which is a pretty stupid thing to do for a movie you convinced yourself into knowing will be bad before seeing a frame of footage. Or, you don't see it, and formulate an opinion on hearsay, because you believe that if certain like-minded people say they hate it, you will, too. So you'll never see it, and have the nerve to make declarations about the film as if you have seen it, when you really didn't.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:28 p.m. CST

    The Movie maybe Shit

    by DangerDave

    But was this review written by a Trig Palin? That was the longest stream of retarded that I have ever read. He gives aways blocks of the movie, but can't remember some character's name, leaves gaps that just pogo to the end of the movie. Reading it made my head hurt.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:39 p.m. CST

    I swear!

    by KenKRK

    Is it that hard to write a competent review?!? And it kind of reflects badly on AintItCool, especially now that their reviews get cited in film advertisements!!!! To be fair, the people who actually write for this site, for the most part, they're good writers who can craft a well-structured review. And I can understand wanting to include stuff from everyday readers, but damn! Quality control, people! It can't just be a situation where you'll toss up anything on the site without proofing it! And furthermore, it's made a top story on the homepage! Center column with a big red "UPDATE" to draw people's attention to something that reads like it's written by someone who hasn't even graduated middle school yet!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Nightmare on Elm Street Images

    by iloveaicn

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:43 p.m. CST

    New Images that is...

    by iloveaicn

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Does anyone really like the original NOES?

    by braddavery

    I think that movie is shit. Not scary, bad acting, lame plot, terrible direction. What's good about it.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:49 p.m. CST


    by Stunt_Man_Bob

    Wow do you do that very often? To just put words in other's mouth and then rant about what you just made up? Who said the erase anything? The "ruin" them because now for quite a while there wont be a chance to see fresh stuff from any of those characters, becuase all this shitty movies are already there and they kind of have to stick with that,hence stuff like TCM Begining, the dreadful Friday remake and the retarded Halloween 2 I never paid any money for any of those, dowloaded them all. I will see this and make my own opinon like i always do, but feel free to make up whatever bullshit you like based on this other post.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 2:51 p.m. CST

    braddavery the character of Freddy Krueger

    by ominus

    thats what is good about it.for the rest you are right.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:01 p.m. CST

    I heard the test screening have been disastrous.

    by Rev. Slappy

    Fuck Michael Bay.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:03 p.m. CST

    KenKRK Loves Cock Hates Tits

    by Broseph

    It's pretty clear from all of his t&a hate.I grew up loving these movies shit i even had a freddy krueger poster on my wall at age i was hesitant about seeing a remake til i heard jeh and clancy brown were going to be in it.i just hope they don't fuck this up.going pg 13 on noes would be a terrible 13 horror is always shit. and great horror should always have t&a in it.that's one thing i think eli roth got right.yet you here all the fagmuffs cry about it hostel is like a porn movie wah wah

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:08 p.m. CST

    I didn't read whole review

    by deanbarry

    Because I couldn't understand it! "Freddy comes in and forces him to slice his on throat with a steak knife in of her" WTF? Anybody else make sense of that?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:09 p.m. CST

    The Last House on the Left

    by Anodizer

    That was a good remake...

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:10 p.m. CST

    Well I WAS excited....

    by ZoeFan

    If this film isn't an R, I won't even rent it. Way to ruin a classic.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:10 p.m. CST


    by KenKRK

    I'm sorry, but your implication is that the remakes ruin the chances of seeing fresh takes on the characters? Jason went to Hell!! Then went to space AFTER going to Hell!! There was already a point before those films where any semblance of logic fell by the wayside. By the time we get to these films it's just, "Aw fuck it, let's just do something so crazy and stupid, it'll come full circle to being cool and people will appreciate the camp factor, 'cause at that point, that's all you have. Even within the context of most of these original franchises, genuine attempts at horror were beyond the concern of the filmmakers. There was no genuine attempt at making a true-blue, full-on horror film with Friday Vs. Jason!! It was all the fans who for years said, "wouldn't it be cool if they fought each other in the same movie?!" That's it! Hellraiser?!? (which also had an "IN SPACE!!!!!!" installment) Another franchise long-since gone off the rails, shoehorning Pinhead in for like one or two scenes just so they can call it a Hellraiser film! Michael Myers?!? He got in a kung-fu fight with Busta Rhymes!!!! These are franchises that are eight, nine, ten films deep!!! Maybe you're right to be optimistic that any of these franchises could have had new films in continuity that would hold up to their originals, but I don't see that being any more practical than a remake. Sorry.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:18 p.m. CST

    KenKRK fair enough

    by Stunt_Man_Bob

    But to resume, with the new TCM, FT13 and now NOES i think it will be a looong time before we are going to see fresh takes on those... Or i could be very wrong and this movie be a great horror remake like the Carpenter Thing , and the new Friday Part II a great sequel like Cameron's ALIENS... yeah one can dream.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:23 p.m. CST

    so better than most Nightmare sequels

    by Bobba Phat

    No matter how bad this might be in some people's eyes, I can't imagine this will be anywhere near as bad as Nightmare on Elm Street 4-the rest (with the exception of the Craven-directed sequel). If we're being honest with ourselves, the original Nightmare on Elm Street was pretty strong, and everything afterwards was MAYBE entertaining at best, and groan-out-loud bad at worst.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:29 p.m. CST

    Englund could knock one out of the park

    by daggor

    The pre-burn Freddy scene in Freddy vs. Jason was on the right track - no jokes, just Freddy being creepy and threatening. Englund could pull it off if given a chance, as well as slip in a joke or two when appropriate.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:37 p.m. CST


    by spud mcspud

    If it says PLATINUM DOOMS on it, DO NOT WATCH IT. They are incapable of producing anything but lukewarm shite. DO NOT GIVE THESE FUCKING SHILLS YOUR MONEY!!<P> In fact, I'd even break my "no piracy" rule for this shit, just so I can masochisttically see how fucking terrible this remake actually is. Either way, there's no way PD are getting a penny off me regarding this cliche-ridden flogged dead horse piece of ashit of a script. Just because JEH is playing Freddy, that doesn't excuse that fucking AWFUL script, nor the anodyne casting of this fucking OC-fest. I mean, I'd fuck Katie Cassidy as much as the next sex-starved nerd... But I'd NEVER cast that talentless wench. Especially in a role as pivotal as Tina. Fucking Platinum Dunes...<P> And the only way you're getting the Spud in a seat for TRANSFORMERS 3 is (a) Megan full nudity (will NEVER happen) or (b) the full onscreen horrifying death of Michael Bay at the hands of the Decepticon equivalent of Jigsaw. Anything less? Spud stays at home. Fuck you, Hollywood.

  • I don't like Platinum Dunes. I think they're full of brain-dead types without a creative bone in their body. I don't support their remakes. I suggest anyone who agrees with me to do the same by not buying an expensive ticket to see their film. I don't care if this hurts their company and means they won't make more films, bc I don't like their films. If they start making ORIGINAL films, taking chances on young, new directors with interesting stories, then I'll start supporting them. <p> But until that moment happens (and I don't think it will), I will continue my tradition of NOT seeing their films in the theater.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:41 p.m. CST

    Read this if you have a Brain.

    by Chadley BeBay

    To the Platinum Dunes haters: Aside from originals PDs basically makes sequels FAR better than ANY of the original franchises they reimagine. Say what you want about the Friday the 13th remake, but would you really argue that it is NOT better than every F13 movie?! (besides the first arguably) at least PD has cinematography!! The fact that these remakes are really just better entries in the franchise than anything but the originals ALONE justifies the existence of these movies. Oh and FUCK YOU.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:42 p.m. CST

    KenKRK, if you can't see my point...

    by D.Vader

    And instead write me off as juvenile, then I don't think we can have an honest debate about this, bc you're already too closed-minded it seems.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:43 p.m. CST

    I hate you all

    by Chadley BeBay

    By the way, I am convinced you are all fucking stupid and I hate you for it.

  • Is not us boycotting films, its Hollywood continuing to make shitty, unoriginal product.

  • Take the supernatural element out of it, and do a film before the events of the first one. Make a murder mystery out of it. The idea being that this guys was a monster even when he was alive. And don't think I wanted them to do anything like Hannibal Rising or something. Freddy wouldn't be a main character, and it would be more of the people of Springwood dealing with reports of missing children and murders. Beyond that, I honestly don't know what I'd do with the character after he's killed and comes back. *There's always the theme of him killing teens in their dreams *On multiple occasions, he's tried to have a host for his spirit *Teens have manipulated the dream world like he does. *He's manipulated another unkillable psycho to kill for him so that people remembering him would give him more power. *He's even broken the fourth wall! What's left?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:51 p.m. CST

    Hahaha, way to play, Chadley BeBay

    by D.Vader

    Nice rhyme too.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:51 p.m. CST

    To even EXPECT anything from this

    by D o o d

    is rediculous!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:54 p.m. CST

    Nice grammar.

    by alienindisguise

    Bay should hire the reviewer to write the sequel to this worthless flick since clearly intelligence isn't required in the world of studio filmmaking.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:54 p.m. CST

    Just because I don't join in your compaign for more boobies?

    by KenKRK

    To say nothing of Broseph's ridiculously immature post about me? Which is follow by the statement that great horror should always have T&A?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:58 p.m. CST


    by rodvegas78

    o.k.. first.. there's no spoiler warning on there.. sure, it's a remake.. but they're tweaking the story a bit.. granted the review was like it was written by a 5-year old.. F13 remake was a prime example that nobody knows what else to do with the character of Jason so they basically redo it.. same with Freddy.. you do sequals with Englund until Englund gives it up.. then bring on a new actor.. but make it sequels.. if you want Freddy acting like the crypt keeper then do it.. and if you want him serious in New Nightmare, that's fine.. but come up with an original story. They have released comics and novels since Freddy Vs. Jason, just adapt one of those for christ sake.. Freddy & Jason & Michael Myers have core audiences that will go to the theater and see anything you put out there..

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 3:59 p.m. CST

    Chadley BeBay - you fucking moron

    by spud mcspud

    It's dumbass twats like you that keep encouraging Platinum Dooms to keep grinding out these spectacular turds. And as for cinematography? Go fucking watch DOMINO again. Fucking incomprehensible, but it's RILLY RILLY PRETTY!!<p> You're one of the dumbest fucks I've ever read a post from on here. Jesus, kid, go watch everything made by John Carpenter and Wes Craven up to 1992 and learn what DECENT FUCKING MOVIES ARE ABOUT.<P> Fucking kids...

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:02 p.m. CST

    No KenKRK, I don't give a shit if you agree with me or not

    by D.Vader

    But to suggest I'm launching a "campaign" is pretty fucking laughable. I told you the reasons why nudity often entered its way into genre pictures, and you just dismiss my statements outright as being "juvenile" without paying attention to the core of my post. <p> And don't try to deflect the conversation to what Broseph said about poor you. That's not staying on topic.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:03 p.m. CST

    rodvegas78 - Damn straight

    by spud mcspud

    I'd watch a dozen JASON X - JASON IN SPAAAAACE at the theatre than watch another fucking reboot. And why is Jared Padalecki awesome in SUPERNATURAL but fucking terrible in everything else??<P> Fuck reboots. An interesting failure of a sequel is FAR preferable than more pointless, anodyne reboots.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:08 p.m. CST

    McSpud - Explain Reboots

    by rodvegas78

    I mean essentially why reboot? If you can make a sequel for $10 or $15 mil. and it makes like $75 mil. or $100 mil. from tickets, merchandise and DVD's, then why is it so horrible? You don't need an update.. Bond gets updated.. but it's still a sequel!!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Jason X

    by rodvegas78

    wasn't all that bad.. if you took it for what it actually was..

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:18 p.m. CST

    No need for this movie

    by WilliamZabkaRox

    Robert Englund is and will always be Freddy. DeNiro might be a legend but he couldn't come anywhere near Karloff's performance in Frankenstein. It's going to be the same with the Nightmare remake. None of these movies should be remade but Nightmare is a flawless classic. The only updating it might have needed was with special effects but you can go back and easily add them to the original if Wes Craven had wanted to do that. Remakes are eventually going to be all that we have. The classics are slowly being erased from people's memory and with kids today they have little or no memory of the classics at all.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:24 p.m. CST


    by KenKRK

    And you keep ignoring the fact that I wasn't talking about genre pictures as a whole. I was taking about the fact that in the specific case of the Nightmare on Elm Street films, with one, maybe two exceptions, they haven't relied on nudity throughout the entire franchise. So the idea that nudity is needed in the remake doesn't make sense to me. You want to talk about these remakes cheapening the original films, and ruining the original films, and the integrity of the films, but you'll cut them a little bit if slack if they at least throw some titties in there? What I'm saying is, if the original films had titties, fine, put titties in the remake. But if nudity was never a vital component in the original films of a specific franchise, why is it so important they be included in the remake?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:29 p.m. CST

    Freddy wasn't funny in the first movie

    by Jinxo

    In the original Nightmare, Freddy was not funny. He was a fully creepy boogie man with NO humor. The funny didn't come until Part 2. It's memorable because part 2 is soooo boring until Freddy makes his first snotty comment. He comes into the real world, he's slashing up a pool party and then some douche comes up to him trying to calm him down saying, "Heyyy, let us help you..." So stupid everyone watching is hating on him. Then Freddy snaps, "Help yourself, f****er!" and kills him. Too funny because for once we're on Freddy's side. Such an idiot you wanted him dead. Freddy giving him lip too? Priceless.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:32 p.m. CST


    by jolaz

    I hate when I'm on a date with my girl friend and someon forces me to slice my on throat in of her. That's just the worst. Especially if I've just after sex with a new boyfriend.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:34 p.m. CST

    by KenKRK

    "The classics are slowly being erased from people's memory and with kids today they have little or no memory of the classics at all. " How are they being erased from people's memory? And again, why are remakes being blamed if this is truly the state affairs when it comes to these films? If anything, people might just give less of a rat's ass if not for the remakes. Why do you think we got all those lovely special edition DVD releases for the original Friday the 13th films?! They might have come around eventually, but there was clearly an element of capitalization on the release of the remake. Hell, when they released The Day The Earth Stood Still on DVD, they included the original 50s film!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:40 p.m. CST

    Funny Freddy

    by rodvegas78

    Once he was hosting videos on MTV and had an "album" out, it got a little out of hand with Freddy.. he was like the Crypt Keeper for a while.. I think New Nightmare was great at resetting it.. Freddy Vs. Jason was campy, but actually sorta fun.. in certain parts.. what I don't get is why studios don't value these franchises like Batman or Iron Man and get quality actors and directors (not to say that Jackie Earl Haley isn't great), but the supporting cast should be just as important as the rest.. if that were to happen could we see a "slasher" film nominated for an Oscar??

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:42 p.m. CST

    KenKRK, I didn't ignore your point, I refuted it...

    by D.Vader

    ... When I asked "what's the point of a remake?" Look, to begin with, my "THERE'S NO NUDITY?!?!" post was facetious. Maybe it didn't come across that way to you, but that was my intent, despite how well or poorly it came across. <p> Secondly, you need top stop putting words in my mouth and making assumptions about me: <p>"You want to talk about these remakes cheapening the original films, and ruining the original films, and the integrity of the films, but you'll cut them a little bit if slack if they at least throw some titties in there?" <p> Did I say anything like that in my posts? Uhhh, no. No, I didn't. <p> Look, just bc the original NOES didn't have nudity doesn't mean the new one CAN'T. That's like saying "the original didn't have gore, why should this one have some?" when it comes to The Fly remake. What's your point? Remakes should just be a strict rehash of the original? Or should they try something new? Nudity would be something new. Nudity, as I stated before, would be something more entertaining and appealing if they failed in other aspects of storytelling (which is what sounds like did happen). <p> So get off your high horse with suggesting anyone who wants nudity is being juvenile. Slasher films are exploitation films on a small scale. Nudity in a film can be entertaining and its done to arouse. But if you think thats juvenile, then I guess its juvenile to want to be scared by one film, to want to be thrilled by another. <p> But to make it obvious, in case it isn't already, I completely disagree with your attitude that if it wasn't in the original, its not needed here. I never said nudity was needed. I never said its "important they be included in the remake". <p> I'm merely of the mind that including nudity would make it more entertaining, like it did with the Friday the 13th remake, an example I made way up above.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:42 p.m. CST

    I will see this movie..

    by rodvegas78

    because I am a fan of Freddy and even a crappy Freddy movie I will go see, just like Jason or Michael Myers or any of them.. because I'd rather have crap than nothing at all..

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:49 p.m. CST

    PG 13? Fucking cunts.

    by V'Shael

    I'll never watch an 18's horror movie which has been pulled back to PG 13.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:50 p.m. CST

    Gore of the Fly Remake vs Adding Nudity to NOES

    by KenKRK

    Gore of the Fly remake - genuinely adds to the horror, but most importantly, to the story of the film. Adding nudity to A Nightmare On Elm Street - oh look, nudity.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Was this review written in Engrish?

    by ColonelFatheart

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 4:57 p.m. CST

    EXACTLY my point, KenKRK

    by D.Vader

    Its there for the entertainment value.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:01 p.m. CST

    Or is it Palinese?

    by ColonelFatheart

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:02 p.m. CST

    Why even run this review?

    by ColonelFatheart

    Aren't there other reports?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Great Review!!! Another film done by Michael Bay's

    by 420 Boylston St

    Shitty production company. Now let's see, what other films that were great that Mikey and his team of MTV rejects can fuck up next? I got it! THE BIRDS!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:07 p.m. CST


    by ebonic_plague

    I read your standard and wrong response... :) <p> That said, I AM used to smarter. This review punched the fish, hard.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:07 p.m. CST

    Actually, The Birds is in preproduction...

    by D.Vader

    Can't remember if Platinum Dunes is doing it or not (I don't think so). Sadly, Poltergeist is on the chopping block too.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:09 p.m. CST

    Public school education

    by Crooooooow

    Sounds like the reviewer was of the african american persuasion. 'Yo that Freddy done made that guy cut on his throat in fron' of her' Bet he was talking on his cel during the preview as well.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:10 p.m. CST

    "This movie sounds like shit!"

    by Bramton1

    This is a TERRIBLE review. Seriously, the reviewer could make Citizen Kane, The Godfather, and Return of the King sound like shit. Godawful spelling and grammar aside, the reviewer makes the movie sound like it's 30 minutes long. "She doesn’t remember knowing him before high school so she decides to investigate and then dies next to another boyfriend she has after sex." What, does she decide to investigate...right after sex? Crap.<p>I am concered, however. The makeup sounds like crap, and I'm disappointed that the Glen character lives. I'm very curious about the voice, since it was suggested that the voice we heard in the trailer wasn't the finalized version.<p>But I refuse to take much stock in a review that bashes the movie because (a) "Fun Freddy" is an absentee (the best Freddy was the fucked up, not silly version. My favorite bit of Nightmare 3, a great movie, was when Freddy gutted Nancy. No silly phrases. He just said, "Die!"), (b) there's no nudity (forgive me, I forget all the tit shots in Nightmare or New Nightmare), and (c) there's not a lot of profanity.<p>Why is the fact that Freddy was indeed a child molester (big shocker) was a big reveal. The guy is going in people's dreams and killing people. I certainly didn't hink he was a choir boy.<p>And I'm fine with this "weeks later" bit. The ending of the original never made a lot of sense. Was it a dream? Did defeating Freddy reset everything? Did it not actually happen (since Nancy is under the impression in Nightmare 3 that she did indeed defeat Freddy). I like this ending. If the movie's successful, it would be a good lead-in for a sequel.<p>Hey, the movie might be shit. But it's hard to tell anything from this review. That definitely was shit. And I'm still be there on April 30 with bells on (whereever that means).

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:18 p.m. CST

    There was Nudity in the Original

    by Anodizer

    Nancy in the Bathtub. There wasn't even that...

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:18 p.m. CST

    Wow Crooooooow.

    by ColonelFatheart

    You sound like a real asshole. For what it's worth, I was educated at public schools from preschool through college, and I'm a pretty fucking articulate chap.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:23 p.m. CST

    This review is meaningless

    by PinkFloyd7

    Will this site publish anything, no matter how poorly written? "The movie starts off at a diner with a boy at a table trying to stay awake while talking to his girlfriend about his nightmares" Ever heard of something called a COMMA? "He falls asleep and Freddy comes in and forces him to slice his on throat with a steak knife in of her." WTF??? "Next is the funeral where the Tina character (they changed her name to I don’t remember what) realizes from an old picture she sees of her boyfriend that she knew him as a child. She doesn’t remember knowing him before high school so she decides to investigate and then dies next to another boyfriend she has after sex." Again, NO FUCKING COMMAS. This is one run-on sentence after another and it's exhausting to read. "The exact same way she dies in the original." THIS IS NOT A SENTENCE. I could go on and on through this whole review, but I won't. My 4 year old daughter can write better than this.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:27 p.m. CST

    PinkFloyd, the real issue is with the "editors."

    by ColonelFatheart

    They need to start editing for style, grammar and spelling.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:36 p.m. CST

    If he didn't like it...

    by Super Nintendo Chalmers

    Maybe the review means more than it seems. How good can the movie be if someone with the intellect of this reviewer didn't even like it?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:39 p.m. CST

    Engrish is art. You, sir, have demonstrated it magnificently.

    by anonymoose

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:43 p.m. CST

    Ah, but another dash of Engrish would do this review some good.

    by anonymoose

    While speaking to that girl friend concerning that unpleasant impression it begins, with the diner where the boy has been attached with the table which tries the fact that as for the movie the eye has awakened and is restricted (as for girl essentially it is Tina from the unpleasant impression of OG,). He falls asleep, Freddy enters, that of the throat where the knife for her stake has been attached to him it makes slice. <P> I thought of that it is latent characteristic in the movie at this point in time. <P> There is a funeral next in the place where it actualizes from the old image where what as for quality (those have not remembered her name in me, it changed,) her of Tina she her boyfriend looks at that he is known as a child. As for her we have decided to investigate the fact that the high school therefore she has known him you do not remember and, with next door of the alone she has next after the characteristic boyfriend it does not die anymore before. <P> The same method she of strictness dying being the original. Then as for him when you say, her how concerning because Nancy finds whether it died, it escapes to her, and is obstructed and is killed in profit, and that cell. This is about to become sluggish. <P> Nancy is reversed, perhaps the other child handful of over there goes into the same preschool entirely, as for their parents is disturbed by the landscape gardener who has lived in the basement before the attending school which was thought: Fred Krueger. Them concerning that when speaking to their children, it is said to those which it keeps accompanying concerning cave Freddy of secret. <P> Throw the can where the lowering and the gas which child (that time when there is who 4 and 5 years old) those search with the word of Freddy are attached with him, and the murder do him. This time there is Freddy after the all the child who goes into the preschool. <P> Freddy was appealed to this time there are 2 children who pass even now when someone has lived those contacts. The quality of Nancy and Johnny Depp. It moves to the being broken eye before the attending school which those is old in the room whose Freddy of the basement is old and is given up. And it is large in end of the movie it makes clear? You must look at the movie in order to inspect, probably will be ............. <P> Then suddenly Freddy, when her mother slicing the clamp and her head, through the mirror in regard to presumption you speak Nancy to her mother after the week when her arm of the topping lift from her fight is loaded. Roll confidence. <P> With the value of the thing which what is seen here. Those you took the good movie, destroyed. Simultaneously the surface where then realistic Freddy which was made is burnt and fearful United Nations. The cameo it did not do anywhere by Robert England which the top of that should find. 1-2 there is no suitable dead scene supervision outside that with value. That like for the cable movie seems that was almost made. <P> As for pleasure Freddy us there is there, it makes, joke, but whether someone remembered that victim in just last 10 minutes of the movie was slow excessively to that in sacrifice. The fact that I this movie am good really and have done was desired. As for me many gore or blood and nude image, and as for me just one time work because you have not inquired about that it has "sexual intercourse" so prepare you yourself who bet the fact that it is the attempt where those make PG-13 to that and go. <P> Me Anodizer telephone.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:54 p.m. CST

    "throw a lit can of Gas at him and kill him"

    by torgosPizza

    Agree with JamesWest, this kid needs to pass 3rd grade remedial writing before he should be allowed to write a review.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 5:55 p.m. CST

    PG-13 fear

    by Bouncy X

    why are so many afraid? most if not all of PD's movies have been R, including Friday, so why does anything think this will be any different? it would be strange for them to make an R-rated Friday but have Nightmare be anything less.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 6:01 p.m. CST

    While I'm not expecting much from this

    by schadenfreudian

    that review looks like it was written by someone in a special ed. ESL class. Seriously, my girlfriend's three year old niece is more coherent.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 6:15 p.m. CST

    "Me Anodizer telephone. "

    by schadenfreudian

    Anonymoose wins the talkback.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 6:20 p.m. CST

    Professional work, 'moose.

    by ColonelFatheart

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 6:24 p.m. CST

    You don't see any real nudity when Nancy's in the bathtub!

    by KenKRK

    In any event, I look at is as a standpoint of the original film being somewhat against the grain compared to other slasher films. By '84, there was a clear checklist that a lot of films followed, making A Nightmare On Elm Street rather unique. Yes, it was a slasher film, there were elements to set it apart. A lot of this due to Freddy. He wasn't a mask-wearing mute, and you actually get an emotional response from him. Whereas Michael and Jason just come off as faceless killdrones, there's a clear sense that Freddy just loves killing and instilling fear. Furthermore, there's the supernatural element to set it apart as well. A killer killing you in your sleep? For 1984, that's pretty high concept for a slasher film. Not to mention, the bodycount wasn't terribly high, either. So for remake to resort to elements of the genre that the original didn't see fit to use, it kind of cheapens the spirit of the original, which clearly benefited from going against the grain. Lest we forget, this film put New Line on the map as a legitimate film studio. How many other horror franchises make such a claim? Even Lionsgate was well on its way to being established before the Saw films.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 6:30 p.m. CST

    my soul is raped...

    by immortal_pirate

    I cannot, in good conscence (whatever) see this disaster of a remake. I will enjoy the original and "New Nightmare" and leave it at that. Michael Bay must be destroyed.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Re: Remakes, Shitty NOES

    by ArmageddonProductions

    First of all, both Carpenter with THE THING and THE FLY, directed by David Cronenberg, were remaking movies at least 30 years old, in a completely different medium (from the originals' black and white film) and made as pet projects, not desperate cash grabs ... and made by directors who were eminently qualified to "do better" than their forebears. Have you tried sitting through the original FLY lately? Yowsa. Dante hit that one on the head when he spoofed it in MATINEE.</p><p> Second of all, when has ANYONE in the last ten years said "Wow, that {fill in the blank with a movie title you really loved about twenty years ago} remake kicked the original's ASS!!!" Of COURSE it's gonna be bad! Hell, given Craven's post-NOES career, I'm not so sure the original just wasn't ACCIDENTALLY good.</p><p> Anyway, for those keeping score, Freddy K. didn't start doing the wisecrack thing (sparingly) until Part 2, and didn't turn into a cartoon character until 3. He wasn't a comedian in the first one. He was also all kinds of icky (ripping off his burnt facial skin to reveal his skull, emerging from beneath a sheet that stuck to his "wet" face, lopping off his fingers to bleed some yellowish gunk, spewing maggots from a chest wound, etc.). By Part 2, he was a stand-in for the homosexual id and by Part 3, he was wearing a tux, disguised as Dick Cavett ad pretty much couldn't appear onscreen for more than fifteen seconds without snarling out some tee shirt worthy catchphrase.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 6:55 p.m. CST

    I need tits in this. Is it too late to cast Christina Hendricks

    by Stuntcock Mike

    or Virginia Madsen. <p> Seriously. <p> Tits.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 7:02 p.m. CST

    Since when were the Freddy movies good enough

    by planetran_fan

    to warrant a remake. I thought all of them were shit.

  • Great first film that genuinely scary, the rest were sick merchandising bollocks. "Dress like a paedophile for Halloween! Wear a paedophile's claw!" "Listen to a paedophile's rap song!" What was Robert Englund thinking!?!?!?!?!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 7:32 p.m. CST

    Did you know marshmallows used to be hand-made?

    by JT Kirk

    It's true, they were lovingly crafted by hand, it took time and care and just the right amount of real vanilla and cane sugar. Each one was hand cut and set to cool slowly, giving them the perfect flavor and texture. They were a true confection, even if they were just sugary trivialities when all was said and done.<p>Flash forward, and big corporations came in and said "we can make these marshmallows for the masses! We can make them more profitable and faster and more available, it'll be great," and they brought in their machines and their artificial flavors and their corn syrup, and started mass-producing something that had only a vague similarity to the original confection known as the marshmallow. Instead, this new thing was a cheap, pale, sloppy imitation that was dumbed down so as to appeal to the poor masses. <p>Eventually, as time passed, the masses became entirely used to these so-called 'marshmallows' and completely forgot about the real treat of its origin. Generation after generation grew up with marshmallows that were made quickly and cheaply by a machine, spit lazily into great bags and sold for pennies. Eventually, these marshmallows were not even complex enough to be seen as a treat of their own, but only as an addition to finer treats that needed a simple, spongy topping. None the less, these marshmallows had finally become ubiquitous. <p>Some day, in a few generations, everything that was good and great and just simple, even stupid fun about the 20th century will be rehashed by the corporations now running Hollywood in the same manner so that the originals won't even be remembered, and their pale imitators will be flavorless pap, now entirely devoid of meaning, simply another bland product suckering people into spending quick money without any originality.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 7:37 p.m. CST

    Curiosity will still have me in the theater.

    by bigbaldpapa

    The original was great. Curiosity (good or bad) will have me seeing this regardless of reviews.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 8:28 p.m. CST

    Johnny Depp...

    by REDD

    Cast him as the girls dad...he's about the same age now that John Saxon was in the original.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 8:32 p.m. CST

    PG-13 = Me passing.

    by Judge Briggs

    Fuck you for making this a PG-13! Are you serious?

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 8:58 p.m. CST

    This isn't a review, it's a book report

    by Trazadone

    One reason I come to this site less and less is that the reviews are increasingly amateurish and the writing is atrocious. This is a pathetic "review" and it's not worth posting.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 9:54 p.m. CST

    Dear God,

    by SmokingRobot

    please make it stop.

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 10:50 p.m. CST

    At least Moocher is making some money!

    by Bob Cryptonight

    I'm all for that! Congrats, Jackie!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 10:58 p.m. CST

    Is the OP 12?

    by gambit7025

    Really? I think they tried to go in another direction with the franchise, a direction that is not dated with 80's campy humor. No one can ever replace Robert Englund's Freddy Krueger so there will never be a Freddy who strikes a ghoulish laugh as he rips some poor suspecting teen's heart out. So get over it!

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:01 p.m. CST

    Trazadone - you're funny!

    by Mennen

    thanks for making me laugh;)

  • Feb. 23, 2010, 11:02 p.m. CST

    damn the guy can't really tell what's a..

    by Nocturama about!

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 12:53 a.m. CST

    So Freddy is basically Trent Boyett

    by smackfu

    and Mrs Claridge rolled into one character?

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 2:51 a.m. CST

    Fudge Packing Fucking Faggot Film

    by Clean_Vageena

    What I want to know is this? Does Freddy still have the razor fingers. I fantasise about having him use them to clean my vageena.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 2:58 a.m. CST

    Hollywood Horror is largely bad nowadays

    by PTSDPete

    </p>Because these studio fucks are too inhibited, too concerned, too cautious to make their shit REALLY edgy, REALLY scary, REALLY riveting - for fear of antagonizing authority, and everyone now stuck in its false pretenses. </p></p>People know deep in their hearts, that they were made to mess up in the last few years, that they've been had: either through induced complicity or support for their leaders’ increasing barbarism - or are now stuck with the mess those leaders did. 9-11 occurred. Abu Gharib was committed. America burned a sovereign U.N. nation down the ground. It’s all there. Somehow, esp. with the gulf between a citizen and his actual political power being so damn wide, and the laziness to do anything about it, the public can only seek comfort with the current, downward spiral rot.</p></p>And one of the ways to NOT do that is to truly show them what their current disposition is suppose to really FEEL like. </p> </p>So you know, if there is some way to make entertainment out of this ghastliness, while being safely numb to their implications and not having to ponder on consequence - then that could make good money. Cue horror that would be absolutely full of nothing but the kills *, and conveniently devoid of the gripping paranoia in them. And Len Wiseman and Michael Bay’s pathetic excuse for ACTION . ( A.k.a. Stuff with zero emotional weight made for mindless consumption. What the fuck are we suppose to call this again ? )</p> </p>Par for course in abysmally despotic societies that have become afraid of inciting the public. ( i.e. Why is it that most Japanese brutality are highly devoid of actual emotional weight ? They could only let the blood splay and the fighting style go. They don't really want the punches to feel like it could hurt. ‘Coz they are too scared of actually hitting anybody... ) </p>

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:13 a.m. CST

    Lame, this movie has no balls.

    by SlimButNotreally

    What they should have done was make Freddy innocent. Come up with something clever and, at the end, make us pity him. Make this a badass revenge flick where the kids are the real bad guys and they all deserve to die. Then again, this is Hollywood. This is a no name director and a no name studio. They're talentless hacks. If they had any talent they wouldnt be forced to make horror remakes for a quick buck.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:13 a.m. CST

    seriously... most reboots are better than

    by GavinVanDraven

    the excessive sequels where the rules and continuity have been broken beyond any point they could be fixed. reinventing the series makes more sense at this point than to try to go back to the original and its sequels and try to pick up the pieces...

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:27 a.m. CST

    GavinVanDraven: true, BUT...

    by SlimButNotreally

    Those sequels were just money makers. They didn't have a story in place so they just hired a hobo to write one so they could cash in. A remake just has to copy the original, so there's less challenge. To me, a remake that sucks (like this Nightmare remake) is worse than a sequel that sucks because copying the original should have been a lot easier.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:28 a.m. CST

    I like the Dawn of the Dead remake

    by David Cloverfield

    better than the original. I still dig the original Romero movies, but in the new DOTD everything comes together so perfectly. Yeah, towards the end it's not as great as in the first 20 minutes, but still better than the end for the original DOTD. (Where everything is set up for the death of the main characters... then the movie changes it's mind and they fly away.)

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:38 a.m. CST

    friday the 13th movies ranked...

    by GavinVanDraven

    1 The Final Chapter/ 2 Friday The 13th REBOOT/ 3 Part 2/ 4 Part 1/ 5 Freddy Vs Jason/ 6 The New Blood/ 7 Jason Lives/ 8 Part 3/ 9 Jason X/ 10 Jason Goes To Hell/ 11 Jason takes Manhattan/ 12 A New Beginning/ and so you see my point....

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:39 a.m. CST

    those grammars is more to scary than the movie.

    by harmless

    bill clinton told me so.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:45 a.m. CST

    is it just me?

    by murren

    or does that review barely make sense?! i had to re-read parts 3 or 4 times to work out what was meant.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:45 a.m. CST

    is it just me?

    by murren

    or does that review barely make sense?! i had to re-read parts 3 or 4 times to work out what was meant.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:46 a.m. CST

    my predicted ranking for Elm St. reboot....

    by GavinVanDraven

    1 Elm St/2 dream warriors/3 freddy vs jason/4 REBOOT/5 new nightmare /6 dream master/7 dream child/ 8 freddys dead/ 9 freddys revenge

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 4:30 a.m. CST

    DAWN Remake Was Good

    by LaserPants

    Nowhere near as good as the original, though. The original is a horror movie, the remake is an action movie. I was also disappointed by the lack of hard-r gore. Still, the opening credits were amazing, and it was a fun movie.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 5:10 a.m. CST

    This review? sucks

    by BendersShinyAss

    I'm holding out hope that this will be ok at the least. but its certainly not looking to be a fantastic re-imagining. <p>that fan vid on youtube was prob the best direction they could have taken - with the simmering freddy and red hot claw <p> That said, I'm worried about the idea that freddie is a full on deviant cunt bent on molesting and killing kids for ritualistic reasons and being so bent on it he basically becomes a demon. <p>the original elm street was a text book example of how to do a good horror flick

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 5:13 a.m. CST


    by BendersShinyAss

    I would have LIKED the idea of freddie being a full on ..... etc

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 5:32 a.m. CST

    "…The bastard son of a hundred maniacs…"

    by blakindigo

    is the author of this 'review'. Pure. Mulch.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 5:39 a.m. CST

    Is Meryl Streep in it?

    by Clean_Vageena

    I sure she would keep her vegeena clean!

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 5:57 a.m. CST

    The review matches the script I read...

    by Mr. Profit

    Only thing the opening sequence has changed and they added the part with her mom getting killed in the end. But all the stuff in between is just mediocre. The movie has a hard time trying to decide if it is a remake or something else. The characters are bland. You spend 20-something pages of the script with "Kris" played by Katie Cassidy and she doesn't even live and THEN the focus shifts to "Nancy" who is unlikable. "Nancy" then goes through the motions until she is one of the last people standing. Anyone remaking this movie should have known the strongest elements of the original were the deaths and the fact that "Nancy" is resourceful enough to use her time as an insomniac wisely by doing research, and ultimately is so scared of the motherfucker she makes a plan and booby traps her house. <p> In this script it ends with a beating with a shovel. Give me a fucking break... It's like the F13 remake all over again. Good looking movie but it is pretty much not needed. And the kills never go far enough. <p>Funny how TCM was their best remake now looking back...

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 6:08 a.m. CST

    Nudity in original...

    by Celicynd

    Not that I'm disagreeing with your point about movies not needing nudity Ken, but... Don't you see Tina's breasts somewhere before she dies in the original? I swear I remember seeing her breasts whileshe wearing an open button up shirt at some point. Don't have te movie, so I can't check, so maybe I'm misremembering.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 7:45 a.m. CST

    Pedo Bear ^5s Freddy

    by DangerDave

    Too bad the movie will be shit. I always said that if they did Freddy right they would do the creepy child rapist that Englund put out in Freddy's Dead. And then he gets tired of kids telling on him and he starts to kill them with the claws. The dream boogie man comes in the movie at the 1/2 way point when the kids that survived...have to cope with this molestation are being killed....FROM BEYOND THE GRAVE. <p> Make it a hard R and tits would be nice....but there were none in the orginal.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 7:49 a.m. CST

    and Crooooooow

    by DangerDave

    Stick you sanctimonious, racist, jerkoff comment right up your private school educated ass. <P> I am sure that the reviewer is mildly retarded...but then again, so are you.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 7:52 a.m. CST

    Danger Dave, please ignore the "Crooooooow"-ing

    by blakindigo

    of jackanapes. A troll is best left hungry…

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 8:08 a.m. CST

    As usual the sheep believe everything

    by rogueleader66

    How about waiting til you actually see the movie? How do we even know if this person who supposedly saw it didn't just read the script and posted a review saying they "saw" it. God people amaze me. How about letting yourself be the judge instead of relying on the words of others? Naahhhh that would be to difficult.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 9:14 a.m. CST

    by bigbadbob

    freddy is hung like a horse in this one. in the original, as everybody knows, he only had a tiny pecker. has can they go about changing shit like this?

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Remakes are always forgotten?

    by SunTzu77

    I disagree. <br> <br> Dangerous Liaisons (1959)and Dangerous Liaisons (1988)...The Thing from Another World (1951)...The Thing (1982)...3:10 to Yuma (1957) and 3:10 to Yuma (2007)...Infernal Affairs and The Departed...The Maltese Falcon ('31 and '41)...A Fistful of Dollars and Yojimbo...The Man Who Knew too Much ('34 and '56)...Cape Fear ('62 and '91)...The Magnificent Seven and Seven Samurai...Heat and LA Takedown...Scarface ('34 and '82).

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 9:22 a.m. CST


    by rogueleader66

    Can be ok as said above and by others. It's when the film makers try to cash in on the name and don't take great care to honor the source, and to improve upon it, that's when remakes fall flat. Hopefully this wont be the typical cash in. Unless it's pg-13, in which case it will be an epic fail. Nightmare movies need to be hard R, nothing less. Anything less is a dishonor to the original. Haley is an awesome choice for Freddy so kudos on that casting, let's just hope the rest of the film is as good as the casting of Freddy.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 9:33 a.m. CST

    Fuck this......

    by NomoredirtyjokespleaseweareYanks

    I got my Dream Boxset. That's all I need.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:12 a.m. CST

    I disagree...reboots usually worse than sequels.

    by Homer Sexual

    The Reboot of Halloween was better than most of the sequels (except Part 4) but it's the exception. Friday the 13th reboot was actually worse than most of the sequels, and some of them were pretty bad. Same thing with TCM. And this one sounds way I'll go. <p> I will say that I liked the reboot of My Bloody Valentine at least as well as the original. Probably because it had actual distinct characters, some nudity, gore, and had some fun. F13 was just a dreary trek to the end. No fun factor, no scare factor. Totally shot like a commercial. That one was a major bummer and really turned me off to any more reboots, especially Platinum Dunes.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:51 a.m. CST

    rOB zOMBIE...

    by theycallmemrtibbs

    Didn't copy the John Carpenter's Halloween 1 and his script for 2 , did his own thing and caught shit for it because it wasn't your Daddy's Micheal Myers. Personally I thought they were far more interesting than the last five sequels put together...with Billy Bob Mike and all, Zombies' wife however.......... <p> Last House on the Left and tHE HILLS HAVE EYES and The Thing remakes were far better than the originals while The Stepfather, Prom Night, The Fog were complete shit pies for sale.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:53 a.m. CST

    oh and Carrie: the rage

    by theycallmemrtibbs

    Enraged me.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:55 a.m. CST


    by Bouncy X

    i am surprised to see that Freddy's Dead wasn't last in your list. that's a movie where it seems to be universally hated by most fans. as bad as some sequels were, to me nothing can dethrown FD as the worst, even if the remake turns out being a piece of shit, it'll be better than FD by default or something. lol its the only one in the series where i literally have trouble watching it beginning to end. thank god it wasn't the literaly final Nightmare.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:55 a.m. CST

    Can't wait 10 years from now...

    by Series7

    For the Saw remake.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:57 a.m. CST

    FRIday tHe 13TH REMAKE....

    by theycallmemrtibbs

    Made me wish I was watching Saturday the 14th!

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:57 a.m. CST

    I can't hate Freddy's Dead

    by D.Vader

    It was the first and only Freddy movie I ever got to see in the theater as a kid. Thanks dad for taking me to see a gory R-rated flick like that.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Or even Saturday the 14th Strikes Back!

    by D.Vader

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:05 a.m. CST

    As I knew it would be, sounds like total shit

    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz

    No surprise here. I would never see this piece of shit.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:07 a.m. CST

    The Birds Remake

    by Series7

    DV saw you mention it up above. Man that thing has been around for forever. I remember it even had an IMDB page with Martain Campbell directing and Naomi Watts starring.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:08 a.m. CST

    Is anyone really surprised?

    by SithMenace

    It's from Michael Bay's production company for christ's sake.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:09 a.m. CST

    Just what we need - a child molester "anti-hero" who finally get

    by Behemoth

    Pathetic. May everyone involved in this film choke on the undead gastric remnants of Dom Deloise. Rorschach is dead to me for starring in this. I seriously hate this shit and the people who make it. Actually, speaking of Rorschach, this is exactly the kind of thing he'd go on the attack for. I hope this thing tanks like a Sherman.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:09 a.m. CST

    who finally "gets his victims".

    by Behemoth

    Again, pathetic.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:28 a.m. CST

    Really Series7? Martin Cambell?

    by D.Vader

    Crazy. Speaking of The Birds and "crazy", have you seen the trailer for that shitty Birds "homage" called "Birdemic"? Look it up and be scared.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:30 a.m. CST

    SithMenace....To answer your question....

    by theycallmemrtibbs


  • Feb. 24, 2010, 11:34 a.m. CST

    Yeah i think thats all

    by Series7

    Gone to shit now. Martin Campbell, don't trust his name on anything till I see a fucking teaser trailer at least.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 12:59 p.m. CST

    Of course it sucks/script and story issues

    by imp_fx_com

    The original NMOES is great, we know this. It does have some story issues which could have been corrected if this studio knew what they were doing. First up, Fred Krueger. I always wondered why if he was burned alive, he shows up covered in scar tissue and not freshly roasted disgusting dermal. It's a dream world so I guess anything is possible? Why not fix this in the remake? Freddy survives the attempted fire kill and is hospitalized. He's still alive, but not for long as Nancy's parents pull the plug and kill Krueger. This would strengthen the revenge Freddy seeks against Nancy and her folks and explain the scar tissue. An easy fix that eluded the idiots creating this remake. I will also add that if I was going to use the same sweater design, I would copy it correctly without stripes on the sleeves. These bozos didn't even care enough to get that right. Second, this is a dream world and you can let your imagination fly. It seems they played it safe with this refake and didn't include any cool scary imaginative sequences. They simply copied what was already laid out in the original. So in summary, another studio failure that will most likely make a profit because fans are hungry for a great horror film. Unfortunately, the audience will have been ripped off again.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 1:20 p.m. CST

    Too bad...

    by The Dum Guy

    I thought the original script for this kept it vague as if he was or wasn't a child diddler.<br><br>And, if this is going to be PG-13, it has to suck.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 1:43 p.m. CST


    by reflecto

    This is only a test, motherfuckers.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 2:03 p.m. CST

    Who's the Wordsmith?

    by Michael Fall

    Would someone please translate this to English?

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 2:05 p.m. CST

    Fucked up opportunity....

    by Mr. Profit

    Cause anything can happen in your dreams. Anything is possible. So why the lame dream sequences? Also Freddy doesn't have to look like a realistic burn victim since again, it's a dream world. In an attempt to be gritty and realistic they somehow forgot this was a horror slasher flick with fantasy elements that allow you to go all out. Jason and Leatherface are Horror Icons that had a lot of shit movies. But Freddy? Some sequels were bad, but for the most part, the franchise has more good entries than bad ones. This was the opportunity Platinum Dunes needed to prove themselves to the haters. But all they continue to prove is that they make great looking but mediocre horror films. <p>Side note: Anyone who thinks MBV:3D is a better movie than the TCM reboot is smoking that good shit. What a corny, lame, ugly shot movie with soap opera twists that was. If you view the TCM reboot as TCM 5, its a perfectly fine slasher film with great pacing. It's PD's best movie to date, and it was their first one... They need to get it together.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 2:26 p.m. CST

    The original didnt have nudity

    by SlimButNotreally

    There are a couple of moments of near nudity, but no actual nudity. In Tina's case, her shirt is pulled open but no tits pop out. Also, I noticed she's wearing shorts when she gets killed in the remake. In the original she was wearing panties. The bathtub scene didnt really have any nudity, either. The body double they used for Nancy when she's pulled underwater was more than likely wearing some sort of body suit

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 2:49 p.m. CST

    The "Freddy is innocent" idea had a lot of potential..

    by shaneo632

    Would have been a timely indictment of senseless mob rule, but of course we need the safe PG-13

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 3:49 p.m. CST

    The ONLY way this could have been better than the original...

    by D.Vader

    Was with the DREAM SEQUENCES. New technology with a creative director leading the way could have made some really fucked up dream imagery that had us as an audience questioning what was real and what was imagined. <p> Sounds like they didn't even try? FAIL.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 4:54 p.m. CST

    Well, I may or may not be smoking....

    by Homer Sexual

    But MBV is way, way better than TCM. But I am not into torture flicks. I am into keep-you-guessing, throw some gore at me and like I said, MBV was a lot of fun, which is more than I can say for TCM, which was a lot of tedious. I will say that the end of MBV was lame, but it was still the only reboot I can think of that I actually enjoyed.

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 5:29 p.m. CST

    I'm still seeing it. Fuck this review.

    by Dr. Samuel Loomis

  • Feb. 24, 2010, 5:43 p.m. CST

    Wouldnt he just molest them in their dreams?

    by SlimButNotreally

    If I'm a child molester...I'm molesting people in their dreams, not killing them!!! and my movie would be called A BONER ON ELM STREET

  • Feb. 25, 2010, 12:11 a.m. CST

    And this too shall rule

    by JeanGrey_X23_lesboSex