Cool News
Why are you screamin'? I haven't even cut you yet. New NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET trailer hits the intertubes!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. Remake, reboot, whatever they're calling this new NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET movie I gotta say... it's looking sharp. Pardon the pun.
Visually the flick looks stunning... high production value, Jackie Earle Haley looks to be really kicking ass and taking names as Freddy and the nightmare imagery is cranked up to 11.
There's only one shot in the trailer that really turns me off and that's the redo of Freddy coming through the wall. Here it's a massive CGI smear that makes me think these kind of computer effects haven't evolved since Peter Jackson used them in THE FRIGHTENERS almost 15 years ago.
The original shot used a very cheap, simple trick of stretching a sheet of spandex against a hole in the wall, matching it to the color of the real wall, and pushing against it. And it looks a trillion times better.
But I think I automatically have a dislike of these repeated shots. My favorite stuff in this trailer and the first teaser was the new imagery, showing Krueger's origin, etc. Every time I see the bathtub scene or the Tina murder scene or the wall-stretching scene I am forced to compare it with a movie that genuinely got under my skin as a kid and, as a result, means a lot to me today. I almost wish they did a whole different story, no Nancy, etc.
Anyway, that's all my jibba-jabba. I'm hoping they knock this one out of the park.
A Nightmare on Elm Street Trailer 2 in HD
Trailer Park Movies | MySpace Video
You can see it bigger on MySpace's video page.
Thanks to our biggest fan in talkback, TehCreepyThinMan, for pointing it out!
-Quint
quint@aintitcool.com
Follow Me On Twitter
A Nightmare on Elm Street Trailer 2 in HD
Trailer Park Movies | MySpace Video
-
+ Expand All
-
I guess I should watch it and not try to be first
-
A total reinterpretaion, not just slight tweeks.Years ago Fangoria mag talked about tests on freddy's make-up that had teeth exposed etc{pre casting of Englund}Fred was really meant to be a fucked up nightmare guy, not just a burns victim .the makeup kevin Yeager designed for Nightmare 2 just referenced real burns victims {which doesn't make any real sense freddy burned to death, why would his ghost or whatever he's meant to be have healed and scarred.He'd just be crispy looking }They've missed a chance here to push the look a lot more
-
Anyone else turned off by having 30 year olds pretend to be high schoolers? Or is this set at grad school? These actors remind me of the time Creed from the Office trying to play a 20 something slacker by dying his hair.
-
...who, or what is next for JEH. Hope he doesn't end up being behind a mask for his entire career. Playing Ronnie McGorvey in Little Children for instance, is a real stand-out. I know he's been around for sometime but come out from behind the mask Jackie, at least once in a while.
-
Why not just watch the original? Why bother seeing a shot-4-shot remake? Where is hollywoods originality?
-
Feb 25, 2010 6:11:34 AM CST
CEILING CAT ALMIGHTY QUINT, YOU ACTUALLY LIKED THAT SHIT?!?
by tehcreepythinman
The new trailer for Michael Bay's A Nightmare on Elm Street redux and it looks just as fucking terrible as we have come to expect from King Merde’s trash factory. The cast look like generic Jersey Shore asswipes (zero character, charisma or personality) and it’s saturated with that annoying fucking MTV style that we have come to expect from almost every single goddamn Horror movie of the last decade. Most disappointing is the way that Freddy looks less like a demon then a guy in a burn ward. The Nightmare series was unique because it applied dream logic and surrealism to the slasher formula which had become stale by 1984 when the first NOES was released. As the sequels marched forward, Krueger became less of a monster then a wisecracking douchebag who spouted bon mot’s after offing some kid like a Roger Moore era Bond whacking a mustache twirling villain. I wasn’t all that crushed about a remake and not that upset over Jackie Earl Haley replacing Robert Englund since he had been playing Freddy as a clown for far too long while Haley kicked ass in Watchmen. But the real crime is that Bay didn’t even try to hire someone with any sort of vision to make this thing. My first choice would have been David Lynch since his take on Krueger would have most probably portrayed him as the dark undercurrent of white picket fence middle America and there was much potential in a NOES remake for psychological mindfucking with no sign of a cunting Nintendo Power Glove. He couldn’t have even hired someone interesting from the music video industry like, say, Chris Cunningham who has a track record of weird and disturbing music video’s and commercials. I think “disturbing” is what I’m really looking for from a NOES movie these days. Maybe it’s because I’m getting older (31 FYI) but I’d like less of a punning villain slicing up teenagers and more creepy, surrealistic headgames that drive the kids to suicide or killing each other. Can you imagine the possibilities of Krueger engineering a Columbine style massacre by playing upon the fears of the children and turning them against each other with nightmares and sleep deprivation? Now that would have been cool. But this is Hollywood and Michael Bay we’re talking about so there was never any chance that we would get an intelligent remake in the mold of Kaufman’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Carpenter’s The Thing or Cronenbers’s The Fly, which is a shame because I think there is much potential in A Nightmare on Elm Street’s concept. Oh well, hopefully in a few years we can get a reboot from someone who actually cares about this series and making something of quality while Michael Bay eventually chokes on a mountain on cocaine he’s snorting off Megan Fox’s ass.
-
Keep hearin the O'Jays song inside my head, everytime I hear of yet another remake. Yeah, why make new, original films, when you can take talented actors like JEH and vomit it up again? Money is getting too damn important, as we all have seen with the EPIC FAIL that the Copenhagen Conference was. So - if we can't save our planet because of the money it would take to do so, how can we expect something as minuscule as Hollywood to do it right? Really, I am already waiting for a SAW remake. When will the AVATAR remake come? Next year?
-
Ah well I won't bother going, didn't bother with originals either.
Nice browser freeze on that clip. -
Feb 25, 2010 6:23:54 AM CST
HERE'S WHAT WILL HAPPEN, HUGE WEEKEND B.O. AND HUGE DROP.....
by tehcreepythinman
Just like the Chainsaw and F13th remakes and, just like them, this NOES will be forgotten in five years by the bulk of American mallrats who flock to see this garbage while they couldn't sit through the originals to save their worthless lives. The only up side to this is that it's coming out on my birthday which harkens back to when I saw NOES 4 on my B-day back in 88.
-
Feb 25, 2010 6:25:26 AM CST
THAT TRAILER HAS FUCKED MY BROWSER FOR THE LAST 30 MINUTES....
by tehcreepythinman
I thought the problem was on my end but now I know it's the trailer.
-
delve deeper into the child rapist/killer Freddy in this, but from the looks of it so far, I doubt they have the balls to do that. Freddy should be scary and evil. Nothing is more scary or evil than a child rapist/killer. Hope they keep Freddy from becoming a comedian throwing one-liners out.
-
And did they CGI the mattress on the stairs this time? Heh. Man nothing can touch the original.
-
Chris Cunningham... wow!
I wouldn't be bitching around if he did it. Great idea!
You're absolutely right... But I don't think it's about us getting older, I think many people actually get bored with the MTV-style shit they're serving us time after time. Drag Me To Hell surely wasn't a perfect movie, but it entertained me a lot, because it had that ol' Sam Raimi touch on it and because I hadn't already seen somebody do it better in the past. Now, I haven't seen the new NOES yet, but I bet you all it doesn't even come close to the original. So why even try to remake something, if you can't make it better or have another approach to it? Right, for the love of the money. As long as people don't stop making these remakes box office hits, it won't stop. Same thing with music. But alas, people mostly are fucking dumb and can't distinguish steaming piles of shit from actually good stuff anymore. -
I would love to see Michael Bay fall asleep in this flick. I'd buy that for a dollar!
-
in the classroom and they cut to her freaking out in the chair, it reminded me of Lilly Tomlin. It reminded me of Lily in those skits pretending to be a child with the oversized chair prop. Heh.
It's weird because some of the boys look close to at least the college age, but the women don't come close to looking like high schoolers. Couldn't they at least make one of them look plain jane?
-
Can't see anything since it's blocked at work. Probably actually saved me from being pissed the rest of the day after reading early reviews on this abortion.
-
for those who can't see myspace.
-
Yes, THE THING was a remake. So I am not against remakes, not at all. John Carpenter made a movie to remember, and you could enjoy it face to face with the original, because he made it with a vision. Fuck it, I want those days back...
-
I/T where I work pretty much cut off all access to video/streaming and community sites. Sucks!
-
Feb 25, 2010 6:45:30 AM CST
I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE BUT I WANTED SOMETHING CLEVER....
by tehcreepythinman
Rather then just some child molester/killer getting offed and coming back for revenge, I would have liked something clever like making the leader of the mob that torches Freddy the real killer who whipped up frenzy in suburbia by playing upon their classism and pointed towards the lower class Krueger as the culprit. I wrote something similar a few months ago about how Freddy shouldn’t just be a generic killer and the whole thing should be played as an EC Comics style morality tale where the children are paying for the sins of their parents while also discovering that the comfortable suburban nest they’ve grown up in was really an illusion created by the adults to shelter them from the real Horror’s of the world. There’s so much great symbolism that could have been milked from a NOES remake and, to quote Shakespeare, these cocksuckers completely fucked it in the shitter.
-
Both remakes, however they both were good enough to create their own atmosphere. Similar to a song that has been covered, Carpenter and De Palma made their own versions which stand the test of time and measure either better or equally to the original source material. Most recent remakes are forgotten after a few years. The Thing and Scarface will always have their own following.
-
.......but other then that, looks like they copied half of the script from the orginal. Don't know if I buy into the reviews that were posted a couple of days ago......
-
I don't want to feel sorry for Freddy. Similar to Michael Meyers in the Zombie remake, why should we understand or feel for the murderer? We don't need to know their motives, some killers kill because they are just evil. Freddy being a wrongly convicted molester would detract from the character and turn him into a hero of sorts and the audience would root for him, instead of against him.
-
I know the whole remake thing is annoying and I understand how it pisses people off, especially when its something as influential as the original NOES, but we will always have the original movie. At least now I can take my girlfriend to see this on the big screen and then bitch to her on the way home that the original was soooo much better. It may even convince her to watch the original with me. So as far as I'm concerned thats one more person that will see the original, classic Nightmare!
-
Think about the Body Snatcher (78), The Thing and The Fly remakes for a second and remember the original movies they were updating. All three were 50’s/60’s monster films that didn’t take themselves all that seriously in comparison to, say, Night of the Living Dead. Can you really look at the pods from Snatchers, James Arness as The Thing or that ridiculous fly head/hand the guy wore and take any of those movies seriously? Yeah, I still love them but the point I’m trying to make is that they are a completely different in tone from and style from the original Chainsaw, F13th and Nightmare which were terrifying and the reason was because the filmmakers looked at those cheesy old movies and decided that they weren’t going to camp it up. They really wanted to make Horror movies that fucked people up. Now lets look at the original NOES. Yeah, it’s over 25 years old but the only thing that dates it is the fashion of the times. Otherwise it’s still as powerful as it was the day it was released. It’s not some goofball kiddie flick and despite the movies low budget, the effects were and still are horrific and disturbing. So what is the point of remaking it? I’ll tell you. It’s because the studio’s are being run more and more like corporation and, as such, are in the control of braindead scum who wouldn’t be out of place at the New York Stock Exchange. These people are NOT creative and are NOT interested in experimenting. All they want is to turn cinema into a brand that can be mass manufactured and relabeled every soo often like any other consumer goods. This is why they hire cunts like Michael Bay, McG, Ratner etc…. who have no imagination and make movies of pure superficiality and this is why the NOES remake was doomed from the start.
-
Somehow I can't see David Lynch working for Michael Bay on a remake of a slasher movie, more's the pity. As for Cunningham, he barely makes music videos anymore, let alone crappy Hollywood movies. Although anyone who's seen 'Rubber Jonny' can testify that his take on things would have been seriously fucked up. Personally would have liked to see Cronenberg have a crack at it. Or Werner Herzog....
-
you shouldn't be supporting this shit!?!
-
I would rather see that, than the new Nightmare on Elm St.
-
Stallone to direct a remake of Rocky, with Eric Stoltz as the lead!
-
Dunno if the movie will answer it or leave it open, but I like the idea that Freddy may have been innocent of the crimes he was burned for. It adds a bit more depth to the revenge aspect of what Freddy does post mordem.
-
They're all the same ages the actors from the originals were. Check IMDB. None of the actors are older than 23.
-
Feb 25, 2010 7:22:08 AM CST
BacardiRocky, BUT THEN HE'S JUST A GENERIC VILLAIN......
by tehcreepythinman
This was the problem of the original NOES sequels. It became less about the teenagers and just about Krueger cutting up teenagers. Okay, I understand where you’re coming from and if Freddy was the creature from Alien then it would work but he IS a human being and there must be reasons why he does, what he does, which is why you can’t play him as the shark from Jaws. There has to be a reason why he’s killing teenagers and if it’s because he was killed by a mob for molesting/killing children then it’s just a generic revenge movie. You could say it was because the mob took the law into their own hands but IMHO they were justified when he was released on a technicality. What were they going to do? Wait until he killed again? My idea is that the teenagers should be stuck in a situation that their parents created. That one of the adults was the real killer and whipped up the others to murder an innocent man who then comes back for revenge is a much more powerful story then some scumbag child molester/murderer getting torched and taking revenge on the children. My idea just feels like it has a bit more depth.
-
Feb 25, 2010 7:26:37 AM CST
Geomancer21, EXACTLY, IF HE WAS JUST SOME PIECE OF SHIT.....
by tehcreepythinman
Who got what he deserved at the hands of a group of parents looking for justice then where is they story? A wronged man taking revenge is much more interesting.
-
just causes the audience to care for his character. Freddy isn't a Frankenstein's monster type of villain (someone who we could feel sorry for), he is evil, the ultimate evil and there shouldn't be a question why or any particular reason why evil beings do what they do. Are you saying the Michael Meyers character in the remake has more depth because we saw his fucked up white trash childhood and it forced him to do horrible things? I think some things are better left to the imagination. Michael Meyers in the original was just evil for no reason, and I never felt like there was anything wrong with that explanation. Same thing with Freddy. I think that fact that he was guilty of the crimes and let off on a technicality and still takes revenge on the parents who burned him is evil as shit! I mean, he knows he was guilty and still went after the children of the parents who burned him, almost out of spite! That's an evil motherfucker, no more reasoning needed. When we start trying to understand our movie villains and why they are evil, it takes away from the horror aspect of them. Unless he is a tragic villain like Dracula or the monster in Frankenstein, our horror monsters should remain monsterous. Freddy, was a man, but he was an evil man who was burned and came back as a dream demon. We don't need to see how he became a dream demon, we already know he was an evil motherfucker, that should be enough of a reason to have him return in the dreams of the children whose parents took justice in their own hands.
-
i'm glad to see they made it a little deeper-ish or something but you can still totally tell its Jackie and that sorta took me out of it. its sorta like hearing Robert Englund do the voice before they change it in post, its just not the same. but otherwise i think it looks pretty cool. and although i've never been a fan of it, the original is still around for those whining that this will or does suck.
-
The guy in the beginning is also Emmett in the "Twilight" movies, or for those who aren't familiar, "The Dude Vampire". I'm still disappointed I didn't inquire about being an extra, as it was shot in the Chicago suburbs. :(
-
Here it is on Youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oar0-HeGqaw&feature=youtu.be
-
He's seen sans makeup as one of the stars of Fox's Human Target. He does have a terrible wig on, but his face is his own. Fun character, too. Anyone know what kind of ratings that show's getting?
-
How much did his company give you this time?
-
i think most horror movies suck, this doesn't look too different. however for people who like horror movies this looks like it could be ok. doubtful though.
-
If you were a ten year old and you didn't know any better.
-
is nothing compared to Robert Englund. The voice is all wrong and doesn't sound menacing enough. I predict this will be a failure. Why can't they just leave well enough alone with classic films and stop making these lame remakes? Is Hollywood that devoid of creativity that they can't come up with original ideas any more?
-
Fuck that myspace shit, I'll check YouTube.
-
The actors are waay too olde. and the bad GCI doesn't bother me because i dream in bad CGI.
-
As much as you guys fondly remember the original, it is pretty fucking dated. I'm not sure it could convincingly scare a ten year old these days. And for all the people who keep saying how scary and fucked up the first one was and how the rest of the movies played a more comedic/slasher angle, I think you need to re-watch the original. The scene in the end where Nancy drags Freddy into the real world was pretty cartoonish. How many shots to the balls did Freddy take in that little fight? I think "Home Alone" stole that ending for God's sake. It was a movie that was creepy as shit at the time it was made...ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO!!!!...and spawned an iconic villain. But it's not hallowed ground and there is room for improvement.
-
This looks like ass. Those actors are definitely too old to pass for high schoolers. It'll probably end up being only slightly better than the Platinum Dunes "Amityville Horror" re-make which is definitely the worst of the horror remakes.
-
it immediately drops the menace level from 100 to zero when it just sounds like Rorshach. I mean already the face looks more sympathetic than monsterous, at least give the voice some teeth.
-
Like it should be Id be wayy more into this,because theres only ONE FUCKEN FREDDY and KELLY LEAK AIN'T HIM.
-
The creature in Alien and the shark in Jaws do what they do because of instinct. Krueger is a man and he has his own reasons for what he does. If not then he is just a mindless killer and that doesn’t interest me. Besides, we’re not talking about the first movie where they could play him as just a monster and fill in his background with broad strokes. This is, technically, movie nine in this series although it is a remake. Ultimately, the most important thing about A Nightmare on Elm Street is the teenagers and their plight. But it would be very boring if it was just about them trying to survive. It worked for the first movie but what’s the point of doing a remake if you’re not going to do something different. You really think that making just another flick where Freddy is picking off teens would be interesting at all? Just watch the originals then. You think the idea that a pissed off mob killing some piece of shit who got what he deserved is worth rehashing? I don’t. So why not turn the whole thing on its head and fuck with audience’s expectations? Paint Krueger as the villain and reveal that he that was really the victim while the teens were collateral damage for the sins of their parents. Scary is the idea that there is a monster under a child’s bed. Much more scarier is the idea that their parents put it there. But that's just my opinion.
-
Feb 25, 2010 8:33:30 AM CST
HILLS HAVE EYES WAS THE ONLY GOOD REMAKE OF THIS DECADE!!!FACT!!
by tehcreepythinman
-
Again! What is it with america, that every freakin "actor" has to be super hot? It's 90210 over and over again...
-
Just thought it was mindless gore and the cliched characters acting stupidly genre entry that we've all seen a thousand times before. It also didn't have the sense of an actual, albeit fucked-up, family dynamic that the killers in the original did. I kinda liked the Last House on the Left remake, though it really didn't have the gruesome ball punch that the original did.
-
Might as well remake every single movie that has ever came out of that decade...
-
...get an eyecheck, Quint, you fuckin' mongoloid. You're gettin' to be as bad as Fatstuff.
-
Suffices that it has the name of Michael Bay in it. Fuck this movie andf fuck all those associated with it. Except Jackie Earl, good for him he's getting a fat paycheck.
-
No reuse at all. JEH will be the only good thing about this movie. I like the voice I'm ok about the look, but all that scene replay, the story reuse of Tina and Rob and the bland ass characters in the script. It might be too much to for JEH to save. Makes me mad and sad. I screamed hellfire after reading he screenplay. I hoped all the bitching would delay the film so they would rework it some more. The Tina bit didnt have to come back. They could have done something different. They should have done something different. Too late now. I bet the film will open #1 take in a big pull for the first 3 days and then die. I feel bad for JEH most of all because the fan expectations for him in this role are near impossible, and I bet Like Englund he would have liked it to have been a regular gig for him ever now and again. We are talking about americas greatest pop horror icon here. He's instant reconizable the world over. It's a fucking shame.
-
The fucking 80s!!! Fuck that shit! The good movies from the 80s were the exception, not the rule. Learn that, you nostalgia junkies!
-
I think your premise has potential. I still like Freddie as, to paraphrase you, a human shark. I like the idea of him doing what he does because he's an evil person. In part, that's because it's in the spirit of the original, but also because if you make him a victim he becomes an anti-hero and you likely end up taking a softer stance with him. If he's a monster, I don't mind if there are things that made him that way a/o reasons for him, even as a psychopathic murderer of children, to feel genuinely (in his own mind at least) like he has been sabotaged somehow in life by the parents of the kids he is now killing in their dreams.That said, I think your idea has promise. Not sure how you could script that in a dream-killer or ghost-killer setting without it coming off as a rip of NOES, but I like a story with those kinds of shades-of-gray. I just to not think we'll see that in NOES.-Cheers
-
Yes I like the Platinum Dunes look. That sort of bleak, washed out, warmed earth tones thing. I think it fits into the NOES world fine. I'm just not sure anything else works in that trailer.I think Freddy looks cheesy, not scary. Of course I never really thought Freddy looked scary.All the reports of this film from the very beginning is that it's mostly a rehash of the original film. I agree they should have done a completely original story with the only remaining character being Freddy himself.I also think making him a child rapist is just in really bad taste.
-
First, they release one spoiler-heavy negative fan review that breaks down how utterly shite the movie is.
Then, they write some pseudo-critical take on the trailer and never mention the fan review again... proceeding to wash and polish the balls of every crap movie before its release date.
Spineless money-hungry cowards the lot of them. -
I like your idea: however I like the idea that Freddy is just a sick fuck of a child molester that has been doing it for years and they he gets tired of the children telling on him and he starts to kill. The non-make up scenes in Freddy's Dead...Englund played that perfect...no jokes, just mean and creepy...undressing you with his eyes and wondering how you might taste. Freddy gets killed and comes back to kill the children of the parents that killed him, the parents of the kids that he has already molested.
These now teenagers would have no memories of the molestation since they have repressed them, but as Freddy makes himself known in dreams...the truth comes out. And the parents try to be supportive with, "we killed that sick bastard for you" lifting the the veil of normal off of suburbia. -
Because I'm too busy SHOUTING "Another remake? Why not something ORIGINAL for a change? Just to try out the concept? Please? Pretty please? With sugar on and all that?"
-
Such a gay expression. What the fuck does it even mean?
-
I am glad that you said it.
-
I don't know how you could view it any other way. Go back and watch teh original again, as low-budge as it was, it had WAY more atmosphere, imagination and story. It also focussed on distinct characters instead of just bringing in completely different mutants every scene. WTF was the point of that? Why should we give a shit about revenge taken on a mutant we haven't even seen before? That's just fuckin' STUPID!
-
This is news for you? AICN has been dedicated to suck and lick Michael Bay's balls for a long time. They have been pretty solicitous in sucking many hack's balls. The most notorious and shameless example was last year anbout JJ Abrams's TWILIGHT TREK. They went completly off the scale on that one. But really, just read AICN's appologetic reviews about TRANSFORMERS 1 and notice how dedicated they were to suck Bay's balls and swallow his cum. Completly Gay For Bay.
-
From the first TMNT movie is in this. "I'm gonna give you something to put you right to sleep."
BEEEASST -
ever in recorded real-life history, has EVER worn a green and red striped sweater with a brown fedora. It makes no fucking sense whatsoever. It's like they just took whatever was laying around in the costume department and threw it on Englund at the last second.At least in New Nightmare Craven worked on that look adding the black trench coat which made Freddy actually look kind of menacing.But now we're back to the stupid fucking sweater and fedora. Christ.
-
No doubt they've been taking payola for a long time. They almost kicked me off for going after them so hard on American Teen on that.
I'm just pointing out their new method of doing so. ie. releasing the negative review first to try and make themselves look more credible.
And I liked Star Trek and Transformers 1. Stop being such a reactionary know-it-all and deal with your obvious anger issues.
peace -
Feb 25, 2010 9:30:34 AM CST
Oh Asimov....give it a fucking rest with the Trek shit
by revenge_of_fett
I mean, it's really time for you to have a good cry and get the fuck over it. I'm getting bored of typing "And there's the Asimov Star Trek mention" in every fucking talkback you go into.
-
If you start to fuck off about Emo hair and JJ sucks sucky sucks sucksucks, we will all track you down and destroy your computer.
-
i like some the stuff PD have done, the orginals are better, but i do like them. and i will see this.
-
franchise with such unrealized potential.It has such freedom, because it involves dreams you can pretty much have any horror set piece you can think of. It has the potential to be truly imaginative, clever and terrifying. This will be none of those things. I'd love to see a visionary director like Cronenberg get their hands on it. The studio isn't interested in that though, they want dumb and safe...which of course is the antithesis of effective horror. Nevermind.
-
I like Jackie Earle Haley, but when I think of Freddy Krueger I think of Robert Englund. The Freddy character in this new movie seems to lack the original's personality, from the scary edge to the wicked humor. Hopefully, the trailer is leaving out the best parts. -- Nick from City of Kik http://nickleshi.blogspot.com
-
wrong way. I really don't understand what they're trying to do with this movie. Is it supposed to be straight up horror, no camp? If so, I think they failed miserably...
-
from smallville.
-
I would love newer ideas, but I'm not opposed to a remake every now and then. I'm just worried that this movie will be good but forgettable. I didn't mind the Friday the 13th remake, even enjoyed it, but it sort of got stuck in the remake pile. I think I'm the only person who prefers the original Thing From Another World to John Carpenter's The Thing. I just liked the atmosphere and paranoia. On the Nightmare front, I think that the new Freddy seems to fit the part of the Englund version from the original film.
-
For getting AICN to recognize cool news somewhere else!
-
I think maybe the reason a lot of people aren't going for his version of this story (Freddy was innocent, one of the parents was the real child molester and stirred up a mob) is that they're imagining that somehow Freddy would get redemption at the end, like the kids would go, "I understand why you were so angry, Freddy. I'd be mad too" and Freddy would nod while hanging his head down and wipe away a tear with his finger knife.
But I think obviously that's not what ThinMan has in mind. For his idea to work, Freddy still has to be pure, unadulterated evil--un-saveable, un-redeemable, and unsympathetic. The point of making the parents the real villains is not to make Freddy sympathetic--it's to make the world OTHER THAN Freddy seem a little less safe.
And really, that's what's so scary about the NOES premise: it stars kids realizing that parts of their life they thought were safe actually aren't. When you're in your bed at home, in school, at your girlfriend's house--these are supposed to be the safe places where nothing can happen to you. That's why the title itself is scary--Elm Street stands for the magic suburban 1950s vision of anytown USA where bad things don't happen. The thought that you're not even safe INSIDE YOUR OWN HEAD--that you can't close your eyes because the world of dreams you create is dangerous--is a truly disturbing idea. And ThinMan's script would build on that--your parents are supposed to protect you and keep you safe. Finding out that one of them is actually a child molester AND capable of stirring up a mob of average people to become murderers, AND caused the murder of an innocent man shatters that illusion.
For this to work, Freddy has to become not a tragic hero getting the revenge he deserves, but a symbol of the evil and darkness that the parents hide in them. Even if he wasn't guilty when the parents killed them, he's a monster now. Because for Freddy to be Freddy, he has to not just be cruel--he has to REVEL in the cruelty. The first seeds of over the top zany comic Freddy in the later movies are the fact that Freddy really gets off on killing in the first movie. It's not just something he has to do; he likes it. And that's what's perverse about the idea of the mob of parents killing someone--when a mob turns to killing, they're getting off on the natural human bloodlust we all try to keep buried underneath us most of the time.
Anyway this new trailer is pretty slick, but it doesn't disguise the fact that the movie is likely shit. -
Don';t do a remake, just have another installment and go with the idea they had in a comic book version where Freddy finds a couple of easy-looking victims. A sweet, innocent-looking teen girl, and her elderly, retired father. Except ... she's a first-person video game fanatic, and he's a retired ... SEAL. And they take over the dream world and start calling air strikes on Freddy. Oh, does he take a pasting! 8-)))
-
I do like that addition, it adds a level of... impossible odds to the situation.
-
Doesn't really sound like Saul Tigh anymore. And his laugh at the end, over the title card, was very Robert Englund. I'm happier about that.
-
Holy hell that looked GOD AWFUL. WHY would you insist on doing the same thing as the original when you CAN'T top the original? Freddy coming out of the wall looks incredibly cheesy and fake. Glove coming out of the bathwater is stale. Tina flying up in the air was done better in the original. Do something new. Add some creepy "is this a dream or is it reality" sequences. Don't rehash the same events, because you can't top them. ESPECIALLY when you're using bad CGI.
-
I refuse to see anything with his name attached.
-
I refuse to see anything with his name attached.
-
After all the research he did into dreaming for Waking Life, he could have come up with a really neat story for this movie. Oh well...
-
Here are my problems with the movie, as portrayed in the trailer:
1) In this movie, the "teens" all look scared or terrifed. In the original, they didn't look so much scared as they did unsuspecting. The original was/is scary because the teens had absolutely no idea what was coming, who was coming, or when they were coming. Freddy didn't even get a name til 2/3 or 3/4 through.
2) All of the "teen" actors here look like.... actors. In original, except for maybe Tina, they were really all complete unknowns and they looked it. The teens in the remake have this slick Hollywood polish, even to their unkempt slacker looks. Nancy & Glen from the original might as well have been people you went to class with. They looked like kids who just showed up to the set however they were dressed and the director suddenly screamed "action." The actors here all look perfectly well made up and prepped for work.
3) NOES is supposed to look dark, gritty, and dirty. This remake doesn't. It looks like HOLLYWOOD DIRTY. This movie looks like a $30mil movie instead of a $2mil one. The production values are just too high here, right down to the CG. The original was made for $1.8mil and looked like it was barely 1/2 that, in a good way. The original's production values were raw and very assuming. Not at all Hollywood. NOES didn't go Hollywood until #3, though the higher production values did start in the abysmal #2.
4) Jackie's makeup is just plain bad here. If not true to the series' designs, they should of at least gone with the ORIGINAL proposed designs. In those, there was to be more exposed skull & sinewy flesh. Very much like a more gooey Harvey Dent. The makeup here looks.... cheap.
5) Could they PICK anybody worse to play Nancy here? The best thing about Heather Langenkamp was that she wasn't Hollywood pretty. She was girl next door pretty. Rooney Mara is, as Seinfeld would say, a "two face". She takes decent press photos. However, in motion, she comes off as a bit like Felicia Day type nerd girl. I can't decide if she's physically too Gossip Girl "now" or just way too bland, in a way that tries too hard to imitate retro.
6) Where's the dreamy quality? The original seemingly had this hazy-like fog to some of the scenes that made it look like a dream, even in the waking moments. There was a dreamy softness to the way the original was shot, even in those dark & gritty moments. Here, possibly because of modern tech, everything is too sharp and clear. This needs to have been a $30mil movie that FELT like a $3mil one. Bay should have really taken his cues from Tarantino & Rodriguez's Grindhouse flicks. That's what a NOES remake should have been, a smartly written, but super bare to the bone grindhouse movie. It needed the oversight of a Robert Rodriguez instead of a Michael Bay.
7) Why the fuck is the original Charles Bernstein theme not playing until the very, very end of this trailer? Why are the little girls not chanting the jumprope song right off the bat? Stuff like that could have really primed this trailer to be far more exciting than it was.
8) Does anybody else smell Die Hard 4 here? By that, I mean that the movie feels very geared toward the goldmine PG-13 crowd instead of the hardcore R fan. I'm really disappointed with horror movies nowadays. They're either super dumb, ultra hard R torture porn OR just plain dumb, watered down PG-13 matinee fodder. The original NOES had buckets of blood & just enough profanity to justify that R rating. More than that, it was actually smart.
9) I'm going to say this, flat out, right now. I JUST DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT FREDDY'S ORIGIN! I don't need to have him humanized or have his origin detailed. It's not necessary...at...all. The cool thing about Freddy in the original NOES wasn't just that he didn't get a name til near the end. Freddy's origin story was little more than a footnote in the original. Mom came in, told the story in 3 or 4 minutes and everything went back to the core story. In the original, Freddy might as well have had no origin, beyond being an undead killer, and the movie would have still been super cool. The worst thing they ever did to Freddy, as the series went on, was to expand on his pre-dead days more and more. All that matters, imo, is that Freddy was a child killer in life and has seemingly managed to continue his child killing after death. That's it. No need to detail his origin beyond that original, terse recap of Springwood history from the original movie.
10) Jackie.... You just aint Freddy. Sorry. Freddy is NOT like Jason, Leatherface, or Michael Meyers. There's a human behind the makeup. Freddy isn't just the glove or the burns. He's Robert Englund's swagger, his sneer, his laugh, and even his smile. Freddy & Bob Englund are inextricably tied together. Without Englund, this is just some guy dressing up like Freddy for Halloween. Jackie was dark & disturbed in Watchmen, but there's a shitload more to Freddy than that, only stuff that Englund can bring to the table.
I don't have much hope for this flick. I can easily watch the original NOES every day and never, ever get tired of it. I can't imagine seeing this movie more than twice - once at the theaters & once on DVD. Even then, I might very well just wait for DVD to see it. -
the only good casting choice here. He looks like a Depp type and can actually kinda act.
-
completely uninspired. I'm going to skip this flick.
-
set it in the 80's
Start it off with a kid disappearing while doing a paper route on his bicycle. The single mother "Debbie" is visited by the police. They found his bike in a dumpster near some apartments. She breaks down
A few weeks later Krueger leaves the towns local bar ripped two sheets to the wind. On the way home- a dog runs out in front of his truck. He swerves trying to miss it. He flips the truck. A tool bag full of wrenches and other heavy items flies through of the front window. When it hits the street a bunch of stuff falls out of it and it scatters about. The police and EMT arrive. One of them notices the stuff scattered on the ground near the broken glass. the Police officer directs his flash light onto it. It's a collection of Polaroids held together by a rubber band. The wind flips the Polaroids over. They land on a wierd looking knived Glove. It's a naked picture of the missing kid. We close in on it. The kid is covered in slash marks and bruises. His arms are taped together.
Krueger wakes up in a hospital cuffed to the bed. He screams in anger.
The case goes to trial. There are no prints on the photos or the glove. The case doesn't hold any water, since nothing like that was found in Freddys truck or his home. Theres no real way to prove that they came from the truck. Kruegers laywer gets the case dismissed. Krueger walks.
Debbie pastes slef created xerox "Wanted" flyers of Krueger around the town and at Krueger work (cotton mill)
One of the workers calls the cops. The police show up and they arrest her. Debbie calls her mother "Ruth" (who lives with her) from the police station. She tells her what happened. Ruth wants to come down to the station. Ruth knews the chief of police's dad. Debbie tells her to stay at home and watch her infant daughter "Nancy"- She tells Ruth that they will set bail tomorrow after the judge comes back from vacation.
Ruth gasps in terror. Debbie asks whats wrong. Ruth says she saw something run behind a tree in the backyard. Ruth tells Debbie, that she's going to go check it out.
Debbie tells her to stay inside and lock the doors.
Ruth grabs a kitchen knife. She walks outside with the chordless phone. We see something race up one her. She screams.
Debbies starts screaming for help. The police race over to the house. They find Ruthdead in the kitchen with littered in 4 blade created stabs wounds. Several of Debbies "Wanted" flyers are scatered throughout the house. The infant daughter "Nancy" is missing. The sheets in her Crib are slashed up.
The last surprise the police find is the body of her missing son "Jacob" in the bathtub. His head and his fingers are cut off and missing, he is covered in stab wounds and slash marks.
Debbie loses it, she sent to the hospital and sedated.
Krueger is found at a strip club by a the police cheif. The cheif beats the shit out of Freddy. It's all caught on tape by the security cam in the club.
The lawyer uses that tape against the police, The bloody finger prints found at the house come back. They belong to "Jacob".
Krueger is released on bail, The lawyer forced the judges hand based on the chiefs actions. The chief is suspended
We cut to a group of nurse pleading with Debbie to come off of the roof. She tells them her reason for living are over. The TV in her room is reporting the news of what all was found at her house (She was kept int he dark about the complete news of what happend). She jumps off and kills herself (At least we are made to believe this- she in a coma- but thats for way later in the story)
Cut to a few weeks later- Nighttime- Krueger is leaving work. A group of ski masked wearing people are waiting by his beater. He tries to run back into the cotton mill factory. His boss is standing behind the entrance door, locking it up. Krueger looks up at him through the protected glass window. His boss smiles, and points to the men running up behind Krueger. Krueger runs through the masked men. He gets into his car. They catch up to him. They pull him out and they start beating him in his back, knees and arms with bats and pipes. Krueger begs them to stop. One of them hit Krueger square in the jaw with the pipe- knocking his teeth out and breaking his jaw. Krueger falls out. The man cuffs his arms and throws him into the trunk of another car.
The trunk opens back up. Smelling salts are shoved up into Krueger nose. He comes too puking and howling like a cat with it's tail stepped on. The men pull him out of the trunk. He notices that he's in a jarkyard for cars. Theres a large hole dug into the ground with a group of shovels around it. One of the men de masks. It's the Police Chief.
Police Chief: "Tell me where Nancy is and I'll go easy on you" (the police chief points to his gun)
Krueger: "Never"
Police Chief: "Fine....."
The Chief picks up a can of gas. He dumps it over Kruegers head. He tuggs hard on Krueger's beard, forcing the lip of the can into Krueger mouth. Kruger chokes on some of the gas, he starts to puke.
Police Chief: "Last chance, Krueger!"
Krueger: "I'll confess, I confess. I killed them. The childs in the closed off area of the cotton mill, in locker number 23, Now Arrest me!!! Arrest me!!!!! "
Police Chief: "In your dreams."
The police chief flicks a zippo he pulls a cigar from his jacket. He lights it. Krueger stares at the flame. The chief smiles, as he drops it onto Kruegers head.
Krueger tries to stand up. He's ablaze. He's screaming. The mask men wath him struggle and scream. they laugh.
Police Chief: "Somebody shut that piece of shit up"
One of the masked men slams a shovel into Krueger head- he falls into the grave.
It starts to rain. The flames goes out. Krueger is still shaking in the gave. The drops of raind bounce of his head as smoke rises from his body and mouth as he gasps for air.
Masked man:"He's still alive"
Police Chief: "Fuck him..."
The Chief starts shoveling dirt ontop of Krueger face. Krugers breath keeps errupting from under each new pile tossed on to him.
We cut to the boss using a torch on the chained up doors in the abandoned/closed off portion of the mill. He races in with an axe to locker number 23. We hear the baby Nancy crying from behind the locker door. The boss slams a hand axe against the master lock breaking the door tab off. He reaches down and picks up baby Nancy. He craddles her over his shoulder- telling her everything will be ok now, the bad mans dead. We cut to her face covered in tears as she screams.
:17 years later:
-----------------
-
You should know better by now.
-
just fuck it
-
Disliking TWILIGHT TREK and TRANSFORMERS 1 and 2 has nothing to do with reactionary. Obviously you know not me, because i'm left winger. european left-winger, which means it makes your democratic party look like the right winger party that it is. No, disliking those piece of shit movies aforementioned has to do with liking movies and loving cinema.
-
...I'm watching this piece of shit.
-
My feelings exactly. I knew we would be in tune about this. Michael Bay is one of the worst thing to happen to modern american horror since he created his Platinium Dunes outfit.
-
Could you fuckin' imagine? That guy was born to take Freddy to the places he should go.
-
Miike, the master.
-
... until the last 10 minustes of so. Having the final confrontation between the two Dads as resolved as a fist-fight was an incredible lack of imagination. And all made much worst with that fucking retard final scene that doesn't match in anything with what went before in the whole bloody movie. The movie should had ended with the boat travel scene, and cutting out the whole punch up retarded stuff. I never saw the original movie, but i hope they didn't pulled that shit as well.
-
I think I will miss a bit of the gallows humor of the old Krueger, but if the movie can keep an ominous tone I'm game. The actors do look like actors, but I'm sure Hollywood wouldn't want high schoolers that actually look like high schoolers. I mean only about 5% are Hollywood gorgeous. However, it would be more realistic and could play off of real teenage insecurities. Just a thought.
-
Couple thoughts: Beaver Casablancas needs a new facial expression. That guy's been the troubled high schooler for like 8 years by now. That blonde looked even older than the waterskiing blonde from Friday the 13th. Jackie is less scary in this than he was in Shutter Island. Maybe he's just not freddy material. The cgi wall stretch is brutal.
-
Some of the best classic horror movies didn't rely on it at all. I don't mind it, but I want ambiance and camera work to scare me too.
-
There's so much subtext that could be in this film, so many twists they could add about what's "real horror" and how monsters are sometimes created, not born, and that we have to deal with the consequences of our actions in cases such as those. Something with ideas like that can be much more psychologically scary than just making another slasher flick. Ugh. I weep for the missed opportunity here.
-
OR fear can just be something teenagers experience before getting sliced open.
-
And would not mean the audience is rooting for him. I don't think the audience would root for someone who is killing innocent teenagers, despite what their parents did to the man. Freddy is still EVIL. But he was made evil by society' evil. Its our fault, we're getting back what we made. But its still wrong and we'd still root for the teenagers, who are innocent victims and have nothing to do with it.
-
up meant a lot to you?
-
I don't agree with you often, but i have to say, you had a brilant idea naming Takashi Miike. No, really, it's a brillant idea! Now that you mention it, it's like the most obvious idea, but it take someone to say it to look that way. Kudos to you, friend.
-
It's boring. The title card 'from producer Michael Bay' is a way of saying 'move on if you value wit and intelligence'. I just feel sorry for Wes Craven. He's a proper filmmaker. Waching a Bay film is like going to see a firework display.
-
That's too much sophistication to ask from a Michael Bay produced movie, isn't it? again, i have to stress this fact, this is a Michael Bay produced movie. You can't ask intelligence form it, because you ar enot going to get it. This movie is fucked form the get go. The whole morality in the movie will be fucked up and misguided and ridiculous. Say what you want about Wes Craven, but withnhis little exploitation movie he still didn't pulled punches on the wrongdoing of the parent,s who by fighting evil with evil they brought unto their own children an evil even bigger then once existed. You think Bay has enough sophistication in his coke-fueled hack mind for such subtleries? Think again, freind.
-
That's reeeeeaaalllly a bit of a stretch for me. "You mean, NONE of you remember that famous janitor, Freddy Krueger, who molested all of you and then died in a fire?"
-
Isn't that the sad truth?
-
I don't like Platinum Dunes. But it has less to do with Michael Bay, who just puts his name on it, and more to do with the real producers who offer up no creativity in their remakes.
-
Feb 25, 2010 11:21:11 AM CST
PS I love trenchcoat & fedora wearing Freddy in New Nightmare
by d.vader
Reminds me of some noirish psycho killer.
-
I loved most of Craven's early films, but recently the quality of his work has been suspect at best. Why doesn't he get grief for his poor filmmaking choices?
-
I'll be waiting. I'll club you with a model of the Enterprise from JJ Abrams's TWILIGHT TREK. That shitty ship is so badly designed, it has a lot of weird pretuberances to make for a very effective clubbing instrument. Sucks as a cool spaceship, though.
-
Do you believe that anything that platinium dune does has not the imprint and say so from Bay? He who is so notorious as a control freak? There's not a single fart released in that outfit that has not the seal of approval from Bay himself. Those producers, they are Bay's own socket puppets. Bay is the one to blame for everything. Don't forget were the buck stops.
-
We're on a thread talking about Michael Bay and your concern is that Wes Craven isn't given enough grief? You need to rethink your priorities! Last House on the Left, Hills Have Eyes, NIghtmare on Elm Street, People Under the Stairs, New Nightmare, Scream, hell I'll even take Red Eye.
-
He was an *extremely* nice guy.
-
Can't wait...I get what QUINT was saying...they could have just made an entirely knew film...felt like a kid again watching part 4 for the first time on TV at 12:OO AM....
-
I'm sure he has a few things to say about the films, but I doubt he's really that hands on. More of the blame lies with the real producers, in my opinion. The ones who, during interviews, spout idiotic ideas like they're the only ones to think of it. The ones who say things like "Our Freddy will be scary and not cracking jokes, unlike the original Freddy" as if that's NOT how he was in the original. Michael Bay set up the company, the idea to remake horror, and gets the money. But I don't see him being the one behind the scenes on these like the others are.
-
http://chud.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2848710#post2848710
I photoshopped an image I found on msn.com and managed to get a pretty clear look at Freddy's face. Just follow the link and look for my post. -
Will forever make me think of Rorschach. It sounds fucking great for freddy, but I still tihnk Rorschach, which is a bit unfortunate. At parts he does different things and differentiates a bit, but I'm afraid I'll think of Ror every moment of this movie. I just loved his voice, dialogue, the character in watchmen...it was so iconic. Might be a bit of a problem. Its such a distinctive voice.
-
I'm not saying Michael Bay is even a good filmmaker. This is the man that gave us robot heaven in Transformers 2 for God's sake. Just saying that it seems Craven gets a pass of some sort. I loved all of those movies mentioned. In fact, Serpent and the Rainbow scares the shit out of me.
-
"From producer Michael Bay"
-
This Freddy is not scary. At all.
Bring back Robert Englund. -
Have any of you original NOES ding dongs even watched the original since you were five? Freddy Krueger is the most overrated killer EVER, his cheesy, campy unfunny humor was never scary at all. I'm not saying the remake will be, but come on, the original wasn't the least bit scary. Any if you thought it was, you're a fucking pussy ass bitch! Bring on Jackie Earle and see what he can do!!!
-
Apparently you didn't know, Jackie Earle Haley is out of mask every week on the new, entertaining show Human Target, and he's really enjoyable in it. I understand that if you only come to AICN, with the shitty TV "critic" that is Herc, all you ever get is survivor and Joss Whedon. But pay attention to other sites because the TV coverage here sucks as long as Herc's doing it (I mean, he cuts and pastes the majority of his "stories" verbatim from other sources), but if you like JEH, check out Human Target
-
Freddy isn't cheesy or campy OR even trying to BE funny in the original. The original is a classic. You sound a bit like an idiot.
-
I'll say it again fuck michael bay.... Jackie interests me enough that I'll catch this for free somewhere.... but I'm not paying money to spend 99% of the film with terrible teen actors....
Most important thing missing from the trailer? Wes Cravens wicked sense of humor! These remakes mostly suck cos the directors are studio hacks without anything interesting to say or a wicked sense of humor. -
..Kaiser Soze do we get this in the UK? Dont think so but will keep an eye out for it. Cheers
-
If you don't like the way it's looking then just shut the hell up and watch the original! I like the way it's looking and I cannot wait to see it! And guess what? I am a huge fan of the first 3!
-
would make more sense if he survived being burnt and was able to heal up for a bit. his outfit looks like something a disfigured bum would find and put together. (also, his clothes aren't burned... how could he be wearing them when he "died"?) therefor the only logical way for him to have his look in the film is if he dies AFTER being burned.... perhaps after going on a short rampage while still in human form in the real world.(surprise bitches!) only to be "killed again while making a deal with some other dark forces" then beginning the dream stalker persona. otherwise the makeup makes no sense, he should look more like harvey dent's left side... except all over.
-
He's in the world's worst wig and fake moustache.
-
I saw NOES when it first came out in 1984 and I was 10 years old.
I ripped my NOES collection & FvJ to my media HDD years ago, as I was practically burning out the DVDs. I do watch them every now & again. In fact, I actually saw #1 & #3 again last week. Love the hell out of them. Love seeing a young Johnny Depp, Patricia Arquette, & Larry Fishburne.
NOES 1,3,4, & 7 remain my all-time favorite horror flicks. If I had to choose a top 15 or 20 list, they'd be right in there.
The original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" is actually still scary for a couple of big reasons:
1) As I said before, Freddy doesn't get a name or motive til 2/3 through the movie. Before that, nobody knows who he is, why he's killing off teens, or even how to stop him. He's essentially like an unstoppable force of nature.
2) The initial NOES preys on one inescapable fact. We all have to sleep. You may be able to stay up for a couple of days, but, eventually, you'll have to sleep. None of us can deny that.
It's in that moment, when we sleep, that we're most vulnerable. It's a very real thing. You can get stabbed, smothered, or shot and you'd have absolutely no defense.
Still, most of us don't think about that. We assume that we're safe and that our dreams are a safe haven for us to indulge in all sorts of fantasies.
NOES exploits this vulnerability and perverts that safe haven. We all have to sleep. That means that we're vulnerable and open to attack. We all need to dream, as it is a source of daily release. Freddy lives in those dreams. He can attack you in those dreams and you can't do shit.
Freddy, as he existed in that 1st NOES is most scary, because the teens are basically defenseless. His attack on the teens resonates with us most because we, the viewers, are no less vulnerable. Freddy may not exist in real life, but I think we've all read stories of people being murdered, or just dying for no reason, in their sleep.
3) Freddy says almost nothing in the 1st movie. If he has a full page of dialog then its a lot. He's not funny. He's not whimsical. There's none of that Bugs Bunny, Loony Tunes crap that managed to pervert the latter days of the series.
Freddy, as he existed in the 1st NOES, was sadistic and even masochistic. He enjoyed inflicting pain on others and even himself. He was pervy and downright creepy.
If NOES has one weak scene in the whole movie it's near the beginning. There's this one scene where he's chasing Tina down an alley like some little goblin. And, in his pursuit, there's this stupid, cheesy witch-like cackle that seems entirely out of place. It didn't sit right with me in 1984 and it doesn't sit right with me 26 years later in 2010. To me, that's NOES' one true weak scene. It takes you out of the moment.
Saying that 1984 NOES is not scary is like saying that the original Halloween worse than the Rob Zombie remake. The RZ Halloween remake was total crap. Michael Meyers may have been more bloody & brutal, but he wasn't more terrifying. In fact, he was less so. Go back to the original 1978 Halloween. Watch that scene where he strangles Annie to death in her car. Just the sounds of her gurgling & watching her thrash about still manage to give me chills that the Rob Zombie remake cannot.
That's my problem with these horror remakes. They often miss the point. The ignore what made the originals so scary.
NOES 1 was about about ambiance, the fact that you can't avoid sleep, and that he's a total unknown and seemingly unbeatable quantity.
Halloween 1978 was scary because it reinforced our childhood fear of monsters under our bed. Michael Meyers v1978 was the monster in our closet. He was scary because he represented the darkest parts of humanity. He couldn't be redeemed. He was emotionless, motiveless, relentless, and stalked his prey on a night that was essentially made for kids to have fun.
Real horror movies aren't about excessive gore. They're about fear. There's a psychology to real horror movies. Good horror movies exploit these fears that exist within all of us. And, the more primal those fears, the scarier the movie. You can even find these key elements of horror & fear in movies like Cronenberg's 1986 The Fly remake, which bended more toward sci-fi. -
but at least they looked young in the original. not so much rod lane but depp, langenkamp and wyss looked a lot younger then the people in this trailer. the "kids" in this trailer look ridiculous.Looks to me that earle hailey is trying too hard to get rid of freddys silliness by doing some monotone boring villain voice. I will give it a chance but i am leaning more towards fuck this film then I am love this film.
-
no cartoony stuff? like his tongue in the telephone you mean. not as cartoony as it got i know but there was always wacky stuff even in the first one. and that scene at the beginning isn't the only time he cackles of laughs during the flick.and while he doesn;t have much dialogue he gives the lines he does have spark and form what I can see in the admittedly brief dialogue scenes we get here jackie boy is playing freddy bored.
-
i agree with you guys. the first film is definitely the best and is nowhere near as silly as they got. I love the film. one of my favourite films of all time.
-
Don't know if it's in UK yet, but it's a Fox show and I think I heard it's based off a comic book. But if you can catch it, it's a fun show...kind of Jack Bauer with a sense of humor and fun about him. JEH is like his personal tech support and shady connection.
-
the world's worst wig was actually worn by William Shatner
-
with Marv Albert a close, close second
-
and Freddy is now a mix of Rorshach and Mel Gibson in Man without a face?
-
The tongue gag was a little goofy, but only because the practical effects of 1984 made the it so You have to consider that, when this movie was made, the mechanical tongue thing didn't seem nearly as fake as it does today. Now, in 2010, you can laugh at it because it maybe looks like some gothic sex toy. Back then, in 1984, not so much.
NOES became cartoony with Dream Master (NOES4). #3 may have started the trend of giving Freddy more personality, but NOES4 really made the series much more ABOUT Freddy and not the teens.
It was at that point on that Freddy was dressing up in like highschool nurses, becoming a cartoon superhero, wearing Nintendo Power Gloves, using deadly Q-Tips, & quipping his way from kill to kill.
Look at Freddy VS Jason. Watch how he plays virtual pinball with Jason's body in the dream boiler room. It's laughable and not in that good way.
Freddy may have started to develop a sick sense of humor by #3, with the one liners, but it was every movie from #4 on where Freddy became as much about cartoon comedy.
The kills had to be more cartoony & creative. There was no fear anymore. The teens had no memorable personalities from #4 on, Alice aside.
Remember Breckin Meyer's death scene in NOES6? He died in a f'in video game and Freddy exclaimed, "Whoa! Great graphics!"
So, if you think that NOES was always cartoony, you really have to go back and look at the later films and compare them to the 1st one. The original NOES might have had that tongue thing, which is technologically laughable and comical by 2010 standards, but there was really none of that madcap, Bugs Bunny stuff. Not in the least.
That 1984 flick was not about Freddy. It was about the town, the teens, and their collective terror/fears.
Wanna blame somebody for the cartoony state of Freddy? Blame Renny Harlin, who helmed NOES4. His directorial style helped to shape the modern, Bugs Freddy. -
Go back to that phone & tongue scene in the original NOES. Obviously, Freddy had no control over the real world like that. Nancy, must have had a sort of daydream experience, which Freddy could exploit.
Then again, it could also be argued that Nancy was never awake. Wes wanted a happy ending for the movie. He wanted the whole thing to be a dream. That scene at the end, where the mother gets pulled through the door by a revived Freddy was tacked on against his wishes, iirc. Bob Shaye & the studio wanted it to be franchise. Wes wanted it to be a standalone story, afaik. -
where Nancy, Glen, Rod, & Tina weren't always only children. Freddy killed their siblings when they were too young to remember. I don't necessarily like this idea that maybe THESE kids were abused and now he's looking to finish the job as revenge. I guess I'll have to wait & see how his tweaked origin pans out.
-
There was no discussion of that in the first one. It was assumed that eventually you'd have to fall asleep, but nothing that said you're gonna dream while awake and you can't help it.
-
Jesus McWeezus. This film isn't made for anybody that cares. It's disposable PG-13 teen garbage to skim some money off of those too young to get a hotel room. The voice sounds OK, but the face is... well, faceless. That's not going to be any fun. Englund mostly played it for laughs, but the look on his eyes & the grin on his face was part of the character. This is going to drag Freddy into the ranks of Jason and Michael Meyers, and that is NOT a good thing. Wait for basic cable.
-
Sounds like mutha f$c*kin Bale!
-
Just make Blade IV. more money in that than LOTR I bet! That'll do..
-
I kept expecting Dr Manhatten's big glowing bell end to appear out of the darkness and to smite the baddie because he has exactly the same fricking vocal stylings as Rorschach...
-
Not official, but that's the current buzz.
-
Seriously, I haven't enjoyed reading a talkback this much in a long time. I normally don't even get very far in them because of all the trolling and assholishness you get in talkbacks but this one kicks ass.
Great arguments on both sides, though I agree more with Tehcreepythinman. NOES did a great job with straight-up evil Freddy. But if you're going to remake this thing it needs a new angle (while respecting the original material of course) otherwise it's just pointless. Having Freddy be framed, while at the same time using said framing to turn an innocent man into a complete monster is a kick-ass angle to run with.
That shit TheJudger wrote was just awesome, I wish he had gone on further. Hope the talkback stays cool. Don't let the few trolls that are here get you down guys. -
from a crap production company. And I'm not one of those bitter "could never be better than the original" whiners, I just think it looks like a missed opportunity to make a great movie with built in name recognition. But then again that's what most reboots are.
-
wtf?
-
Is anyone else having that problem?
-
That's news to me! Who can call that shit he makes as movies?
-
Seriously, Englund's portrayal had a sort of...mischief to it. Evil, nasty, slashing mischief whereas this seems...darker. No humour to it.
-
Will it be bad or horrible? These trailers have given me 0 hope for this movie. Look at the remake to the Crazies compared to this. Well I'm seeing the Crazies and probably not this one.
-
I'm in the UK, and this bitch keeps crashing on me too. Taking way too long to buffer up.
In unrelated news, this new trailer made my ass want to throw up a little bit, and I just saw SOLOMON KANE today, which is the most beautifully photographed movie I've seen in years. Absolutely stunning to look at, The movie is as close as you'll ever get to a perfect REH adaptation, and Purefoy hasd never been better.
After sitting through just under two hours of quality, well crafted dark fantasy like SOLOMON KANE, it's doubly depressing to come back to this cynical, one-weekend-cash-grab bullshit that seems to be the only thing Platinum Dooms is any good for. It's fucking insulting that they would even consider this movie completed enough to release. This reboot needs a reboot - with proper actors, not fucking models, a decent script, at least a half-assed attempt at an original angle on the old material, and A DECENT FUCKING FREDDY.
Depressing as all hell. I really wanted this to be the reboot that WORKED. No such fucking luck. I'll just imagine the Chris Cunningham reboot that never was... -
With Vince fucking Vaughn? NO! Because it was a big bag of wank, as this shot-for-shot "reboot" will also be.
-
THE ROCK was great, so were BAD BOYS 1 & 2. Anything else? Pure aimed-at-the-dumb-teen-demographic bollocks from top to bottom. But Bay loves sycophants, which is why Bay worshipper Samuel Bayer (is he Bayer than Bay though? Just a thought!) makes videos that look EXACTLY like the ones Bay used to. Seriously. Check the lighting, the shots, the editing, the cinematography... Bayer wants to be Bay even more than Bay wants to be TOP GUN era Tony Scott.
But I got to give it to the shit meister... THE ROCK and the BAD BOYS movies were fun. Not classics, but fun. -
of The Hills. Would be fun to see those vapid, privilaged mannequins get picked off one at a time.
-
way over the top. it fucking bugs the shit out of me. where's the genuine fear. all im seeing is wrinkled faces and wimpering voices as if thats supposed to be textbook fear. GEZus! real fear is people hesitating and quietly pissing their pants and then screaming only when cornered!
-
Any self-respecting fan knows better than to endorse this puddle of horse-shit. This is nothing but a rape of the original movie which was killer. Michael Bay must have been a suckin' alotta cock to continue making this shit. And one big black one down the gullet to smear it on us. I don't want his cum shot, thank you. I'll pass.
-
They all look like cookie-cutter "good looking" modern teens. No charisma, no character, just boring. At lease the original NOES had unique looking actors like Johnny Depp, Heather Langekamp, and Amanda Wyss. And all bow down to john Saxon
How hard can it be to cast actors that we can remember, let alone care about through out the movie?
It looks slick but the CG blows it for me. And I can see PG-13 written all over it. Make it a hard-R! -
he became the james bond of serial killers with a one liner for every occasion. although the hearing aid pin drop kill in the final nightmare is great. so mean spirited.
-
is they are going to make it that freddy was wrongly accused of the murders in the first place. i don't want sympathetic freddy. just a complete bastard.
-
their attempt at being cool.
-
brad fuller said that he's accused of a murder hence the parents burning him but it turns out he's just a molester and not a murderer. so thats as far as his "innocence" goes, he's still a sick fuck who deserved to die. read that in an interview just this week.
-
doing something like this, the better it sounds. Imagine a NOES by him. The trailer would be all like quick cuts, light flares, distorted faces. 'Come to Daddy' would be pounding on the s'track. But yeah, he needs to get off his whiney ass and put a feature together. Miike is a great mind, but often throws narrative out the window, which is not always a good thing. Love Visitor Q and Ichi. Tried watching Gozu, but didn't quite get there. Something put me off.
-
You could see this movie or buy the original DVD. Would it matter? Is the original Nightmare on Elm Street that dated. That it can't attract new fans?
-
i for one like reboots/remakes/reimaginings etc. especially when executed correctly(batman begins,scarface,ben fucking hur) the hate for this film is re-tarded. hey, at least the studio tried to appease the nerd herd with jackie earl. Guess what? no one is forbidding anyone from watching the original. in fact i just watched the first 10 minutes of the that version on netflix to compare and classic as it may be, the acting was shit. heather langenkamp's dialogue delivery was like bad 80's porno. the "teenage" prick banging tina was about 35 yrs old. To the many people on these talkbacks who have such a hard on for nostalgia, go hookup your dad's vcr n jerk to some thick bush traci lords on vhs. im gonna knock one out to lexi belle on my ipod touch come lunch break.
-
but that would've required too much thought. ALL HE HAS TO DO IS BURN! THERE"S A MILLION WAYS TO DO IT!!!! Also Bay and his people couldnt figure out how to include racist car-robot characters.
-
.... questioning the justification for its existence. There are some movies I think need or warrant updating or reevaluation. There are some I don't.
The original NOES was lightning in a bottle. It got so, so much more right than it did wrong. Considering that it earned back more than 14x its original budget, I'd say that this is fairly true. Its not surprising that New Line was often referred to as "The House that Freddy Built." Aside from the 80s haircuts & fashion, the movie still holds up very well to this day.
NOW.... While I feel that the original movie itself does not need a remake, I DO think that the franchise needs to get back on track. With the exception of the Craven written Nightmares (1,3, & 7), every writer & director has managed to dilute the character/franchise ever more.
NOES became like that episode of South Park - the one with the water park. One bad writer or director pees in the pool. The pool now becomes 1% and 99% water. Eventually, after enough bad writing & concepts, the pool becomes 99% pee and only 1% water. That's what's become of the NOES franchise. It has become a pool made of 99% pee.
My core problem with a reboot is that, instead of just draining the pool of the pee, they're tossing out the swimmers too. Out goes the baby with the bathwater. More than that, they're using a Brita on the pee water and hoping it comes out 100% clean in the end.
NOES didn't need to be remade. The franchise just needed refocusing. They need to do what long standing rock bands have done for decades. Whenever they've gone too far off course... Rip out all of the self-indulgent excess and distill it all back down to its foundation. Find out what made it work in the first place and just go with that.
NOES 2010 is not what this is. Always move forward. Never look back. You can pay homage to your roots without reliving them. Like I said, NOES 1984 was lighting in a bottle. Recapturing that, especially on a profit level, is damn near impossible. That's one of the (many) reasons why the Vince Vaughn remake of Psycho was such a joke.
Would you rather see the Rolling Stones live on tour or would you rather see a night club cover band? Remaking a cult phenomenon is problematic at best. You want Bon Jovi, but run a huge risk of getting SNL's Jon Bovi. =) Rooney Mara is no more Nancy Thompson than Scout Compton was Laurie Strode. Nobody's going to replace Heather Langenkamp or Jamie Lee Curtis so why try?
Freddy VS Jason was very fun and very flawed. Regardless, there was one scene that really stood out for me. The opening. In just a couple of minutes, Freddy recapped the entire movie series. He boiled down everything you needed to know about the franchise, allowing the rest of the movie to focus on the monster VS monster mayhem.
This is what should have been done here. Screw the reboot. Go for a sequel. Fans deserve true NOES 8. Recap the origin and franchise money shots for newbies in a scant few minutes and move on to the scariest & best possible.
Essentially, reboot without actually rebooting. Comic books do it all of the time, especially when established creative teams get replaced.
If you MUST insist on a reboot, don't just tweak things here & there. You may bring in new fans, but you run the risk of alienating established ones.
Some movies don't need remakes. Period.
Is nothing sacred? (Rhetorical. I know that the answer in Hollywood is "no.") Seriously. Remake Back to the Future & I just might have to punch a bitch out. =P -
Well stated. That's exactly how these re's should be handled.
-
AHHHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
-
Bay has only made bad movies. Some are more horrible then others.
-
Hi D Vader - hope you are well - just wanted to say re your post way above - you very generously say that Bay just set up the company etc, but the real people who should be called to account are the actual producers, director etc - - I absolutely see your point but I think that if you are attaching your name to something so prominently, you should be accountable for it. Therefore the fact that Spielberg was happy to be an exec produce of Transformers 2 makes me think that he is a greedy sonofabitch who will do anything for money even though he has shitloads of it. Now, I'm not saying that he shouldn't be allowed to make both serious films and blockbusters. That's fine and my favourite directors do that - Cuaron, Ang Lee etc. It's the rotten heart at the centre of TF2 - sexist, racist, pro-military - that he should be ashamed of. This dickhead asks me to watch Munich, which he calls a 'prayer for peace', then he makes Transformers - a 'prayer for war' if ever there was one. People on this site complain about George Lucas raping their childhood, but I actually see a connection between REVENGE OF THE SITH and the political gist of his early films. Spielberg seems to have none of that thinking.
-
Good to know that SOLOMON KANE is good. And you know what, i'm not that suprised. i know it's a popular event at AICN and among many brits to piss on the director because for some mysterious reason they decided to hate DEATHWATCH. A movie which is far better then most give it credit.
-
What you say about Spielberg is really a very disturbing though. And i can't say i have any counter-point for yours. You gave me the disturbing though of the day. Consider my mind blown.
-
Feb 26, 2010 6:11:40 AM CST
Bay shouldn't be left off the hook for the Platinium Dunes movie
by asimovlives
The buck stops at Michael Bay for everything concerning what Platinium Dunes produces. The assclowns that worjk for Platinium dunes are Bay's underlings, and as such Bay rsponds fully for their actions. He also responds for the firm he created. to say platinium dunes does movies on Bay's back and he has little to no involvement is misguided. Quite the contrary, Bay himself loves to brag on how hands on he is with PL's movies. unless they flopped, then he pretends he has nothing to do with it. Bay always tries to excuse himself from flops, and blames everybody but himself when a movie goes commercially wrong. But the truth is this: The buck stops at Bay, regarledless if he likes it or not.
-
Every remake/reboot director or producer says the samething in the beginning about wanting to make it their own in same way shape or form and then include scenes and/or shots in said remake... not only scenes but classic scenes the immediately remind you youre watching an inferior version.
-
Of course, because the sequel was made for you, and NOT made for the kids who've never seen a NOES movie yet. Everything Hollywood makes is just for you, and if you don't like it then it's automatically bad. Just like Megan Fox was made to take your seed.
-
I just want I Spit on Your Grave Remake. Oh wait it was called Transformers. Thanks Bay.
-
I felt like the soldiers in the foxhole watching DEATHWATCH. I kept waiting for the big explosion but it never came. I survived the experience. y a y.
-
These actors have no personality or charisma! Meanwhile, just a short while ago: wow these actors were so good in VERONICA MARS. You stupid cunts.
-
I'll watch it, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
-
The actors in the original were pretty bland too. And not very good.
-
If that was yout attitude toward DEATHWATCH, then you were watching the wrong movie. And the movie never fooled you about the mood it was about. DEATHWATCH ois a pretty honest movie. And very well made. With brillant production design and cinematography, specially for such a small micro-budget movie that it is. From my point of view, all this pissing at DEATHWATCH is just loonie nonsense.
-
is that your parents, and damned near every adult that you have ever known has committed horrible acts and has been lying to you. And is continuing to do so even though you are clearly in danger. They are taking elaborate measures to do so, actually building a hospital in the last NOES just for these kids.
-
if you're referring to FVJ, thats supposed to be the same hospital the Part 3 kids spent that movie in. but yeah even so, it did show how far the parents were taking this.
-
Sorry, AL. Despite being a lesbian for the most part, I still expect a payoff after the climax.
-
What payoff you didn't get? you wanted something blowing off or something? DEATHWATCH is not that kind of movie. you can't expect them all to be the same. DEATHWATCH has the ending that type of story needs and demands, If DEATHWATCH is not your kind of movie, then you should get your kicks elsewhere. Don't blame the movie for not being exactly what you want it to be.
-
... of the sin of the fathers coming back to visit and punish the kids. And in NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, they come back with a merciless bite worthy of Satan's best. But as the series progressed, that notion was left wayward, and it just became merely a cartoon story of a quipper who mostly kills anoying character-free teens. And as somebody said above, the series became irrevocally doomed when Renny Harlin took helm of the 4th movie. The 5th movie tried to bring some of the old magic back, but the harm was already done. The series just became a whole big joke, pun intended.When you guys coent on how the first movie is areal proper horror movie, nd which the futher movies in the series forgot it's very point, i fully agree. And this remake seems more concerned in going for the vibe of the sequels then the first ovie proper. I'm actually not suprised that Bayer and Bay made a movie that missed the whole point. Bay not getting he point is him being him. The man will never get the point even if it's shoved up his ass.
-
it was 2 that scared me the most. This ugly disgusting man monster is tearing his skin off and crawling up your ass. EeeEEEEEEyewie!
-
I own the original. It's a good idea, but not a damn thing about it is scary. And if you find the tongue scene with the phone to be scary as hell and not cheeseball camp bullshit, then yes, indeed, you ARE a 3 year old girl. And what the fuck are you talking about, half of Freddy's lines are stupid cheese jokes? A classic, but not because it's scary in any way.
-
And I totally forgot about the phone-tongue. "half of Freddy's lines are stupid cheese jokes?" Can you find any of these stupid cheese jokes that were actually meant as stupid cheese jokes? Freddy didn't get cheesy until the sequels. In the original he was the Boogeyman.
-
There is a line or two in the original, but it is nothing like in subsequent movies. Another thing: they didn't really SHOW Freddy so much in the first one. His face was often obscured by shadow. ALSO: If there's no goat running around at some point in the remake, it sucks. The end.
-
I see what you did there, Thunderbolt. Punny, veeeeerrry punny.
-
I think the reason so many people don't think much highly of the first Nightmare On Elm Street movie and think it corny and cheesy is because they are retconning the cheesiness of the sequels into the first movie.
-
Didn't hear him say 'Every town has an Elm Street' (which is true) or 'This is your stop' while driving a bus and a kid stuck to the front.Best Freddy joke is in Freddy's Dead when he steals the kid's hearing aid.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 171 total posts 169 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 157 total posts 111 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 138 total posts 75 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 479 total posts 62 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 59 total posts 59 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 62 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 48 total posts 45 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 116 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 181 total posts 30 posts