Nightmare on Elm Street--How Will It Fare to the Original???

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,834
Location
Limbo
I have a bad feeling about this movie.

The original was well done (though my perception may be skewed since I saw it as a pre-teen).

This remake just doesn't seem like it will be as scary. And i wonder if it is possible for it to be since part of the original fear factor was the novelty of the idea.

And i'm also afraid they are going to be leaning too much on the special effects.

Anyways, I will probably see it either tonight or tomorrow.

Be interested in what Mr. Horror aka Jcomp will have to say about it when he gets around to seeing it :cool:

Mel...
 

brokenfingers

Walkin' That Road
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
6,072
Reaction score
4,324
To be honest, I think they're banking on the "I wonder how it'll compare" crowd. I agree that it's an unnecessary remake. The story's been told and there are no surprises - only comparison to the original and special effects.
 

SweetSolitude

Enjoying the peace and quiet
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
20
Reaction score
1
Location
Canada
I already dislike the new version just because Robert Englund isn't playing Freddy. They have some new guy, and from what I've seen in the trailer, he just doesn't compare. Robert will always be Freddy Krueger to me.
 

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
I think Jackie Earle Haley is an excellent choice. He played Rorshach in Watchmen. Harry Knowles liked it, apparently. I quite like the original, except for the stupid, tacked on, ending. I love horror, but I don't love 80's dreck, so I'm not that bothered by this one being remade, even though I thought it was better than most.
 

Aleta

i'm mad at the dirt
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
50
Reaction score
6
Location
Austin
Website
absolutelyaleta.wordpress.com
I think Jackie Earle Haley is an excellent choice.

i agree. i think he's a wonderful actor (see "Little Children" for further proof).

i also am not bothered by the remake but then again, i'm not usually bothered by remakes in general. i figure if someone thinks they can take an old story and modernize it, then go for it. i love 70's and 80's horror so seeing "Friday the 13th" and "Halloween" remade (especially by Zombie) is campy fun.
 

Jcomp

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
5,352
Reaction score
1,422
I think Jackie Earle Haley is an excellent choice. He played Rorshach in Watchmen. Harry Knowles liked it, apparently. I quite like the original, except for the stupid, tacked on, ending. I love horror, but I don't love 80's dreck, so I'm not that bothered by this one being remade, even though I thought it was better than most.

Haven't seen it yet (seeing it tomorrow), but the bolded sections above are pretty much my thoughts going in. The original is really good, but it's not one of those flicks that I think should remain forever untouched. I had much more issue with Halloween being remade than NOES. Looking forward to this...
 

ChaosTitan

Around
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
15,463
Reaction score
2,886
Location
The not-so-distant future
Website
kellymeding.com
Early attendance has the number crunchers predicting a big opening weekend, which doesn't surprise me.

I was appalled when I first heard it was being remade. Completely un-necessary, but I felt the same way about Halloween and Friday the 13th (still do). The trailers and clips have me curious enough to go see it next weekend with a fellow horror fan.

I read one scathing review already, which pretty much called it boring, badly directed, and tacked together.

It's going to make scads of money, but it's I have a feeling it'll end up being a "love it" or "hate it" kind of film.
 

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
I was appalled when I first heard it was being remade. Completely un-necessary,

Many people seem to be apalled, and I don't get that at all. Nightmare On Elm Street was not groundbreaking or important when it came out. It was just mainstream Hollywood horror. So a mainstream Hollywood horror remake is not that big a deal IMHO.
 

underthecity

Finestkind
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
3,126
Reaction score
768
Location
Near Cincinnati
Website
www.allensedge.com
We saw it tonight (with free tickets, otherwise, I would have rented it in the future).

There was a decent-size crowd, mostly teens.

Going in I wondered what the purpose of the remake was exactly. Who would want to see it? Anyone who has owned a VCR or DVD player would have seen NOES or any of its sequels, no matter what the age.

And NOES was made at a time when it's concept was rather novel. Now it's cliche. So making a remake is like making a cliche.

I did not go in expecting to see a film that would receive an Oscar nod. For me, this film was to be pure entertainment. Nothing really more than that.

I was entertained. Yes, the film was entertaining.

But it had lots of problems. (SPOILERS START HERE)

Jackie Earl Haley was not a good choice. I kept seeing Rorshach both in face and in voice. Haley is a short man. We want our horror villains to be tall and imposing. Haley was as short as any of the characters.

I kept seeing shadows of the original NOES, from what I could remember. Very similar scenes, very similar actions.

Wooden acting. The lead, Nancy, played by Rooney Mara, was too old for this role. When she was introduced, I thought she looked close to 30, yet she was soon revealed to be a high school (senior? junior?). She was so deadpan, so emotionless, so boring, I didn't want to see any more of her. But she survives until the end, so what do I know?

Freddy had a Reason this time (it escapes me what his crimes were in the past). This time, he worked at the grade school where the main characters had all attended as five year olds, but have all since forgotten about, who molested them (or something, the movie wasn't quite clear), and when their parents found out, they banded together, chased him to the steel mill, trapped him in a building, and burned it down with him inside. Since the children told their parents what happened, they were guilty and now as teenage adults, were being hunted and murdered in their dreams. Why Freddy waited this long and how he was able to actually do this was unexplained.

So that's the basic story. The kids are getting killed mysteriously one by one, until Nancy and other lead wooden robot Quentin figure things out, and Nancy must fall asleep, get hunted, then pull Freddy into their world so they can kill him at last. Does any of that sound familiar? It should. It's been done already, but much better.

Freddy isn't as much of a wise-ass as he is in the previous installments, plus the deaths aren't nearly as interesting or as many.

CGI-wise, the effects are better than the original, as you would expect.

If I had never seen any of the NOESes, nor had any clue of who Freddy was and had seen this movie, then I might have really enjoyed it. But then I would have wanted to see the original to find out what the fuss was all about. Then I would have been annoyed, and said, "God, the original was so much better. And it had Johnny Depp!"
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,834
Location
Limbo
Many people seem to be apalled, and I don't get that at all. Nightmare On Elm Street was not groundbreaking or important when it came out. It was just mainstream Hollywood horror. So a mainstream Hollywood horror remake is not that big a deal IMHO.

I gotta disagree.

I pretty much regard any novel or new 'thing' as groundbreaking and you have to admit that NOES was a novel concept.

The fact that he came for you in your dreams, broke down that wall of separation between the audience and the film making it more personal. I mean, who doesn't sleep?

I was one of the millions of kids who went home scared to go to sleep!!!

I remember everyone thought that movie was scary.

Now, with the passage of time, it has passed on to the realm of cliche, but before it got there, that movie had some serious teeth-- or claws if you will :e2teeth:

Mel...

p.s. regarding Undercity's review. Yeah, that was what I was afraid of. The original was just so well done IMO that I just don't see this reboot being better (besides the special effects). Incidentally, in the original, they did touch on where freddy came from and that was part of the ride, figuring out the 'why' as the characters did. In fact, not knowing 'why' initially made it scarier. There is something very terrifying about having something come after you and not knowing why. And of course they did a good job tying it to the parents, the whole aspect of 'past sins' or 'blood sins' coming back to haunt you or your children/family
 
Last edited:

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
I gotta disagree.

I pretty much regard any novel or new 'thing' as groundbreaking and you have to admit that NOES was a novel concept.

The fact that he came for you in your dreams, broke down that wall of separation between the audience and the film making it more personal. I mean, who doesn't sleep?

I was one of the millions of kids who went home scared to go to sleep!!!

I remember everyone thought that movie was scary.

*shrug* I didn't really. I thought Freddy was too cartooney, and Paperhouse did the whole dream thing much better, even if it was 4 years later. He came for you in your dreams, but other than that, it was still pretty much the same 80's slasher crap I never liked to begin with. And it was mainstream Hollywood horror. So I really don't get why people are so defensive about mainstream Hollywood remaking it. That goes double for Friday the 13th, too.
 

Jcomp

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
5,352
Reaction score
1,422
I thought NOES was relatively interesting for its time. When I was a kid, of course, Freddy was seen as awesome and friends would debate between who would win out of Freddy vs. Jason, etc. The movie hasn't aged terribly well, though. Not to me. The acting is serviceable, the climax and ending bear clear marks of "I didn't know how to resolve this" and Executive Meddling respectively. It was just a string of clever, creepy set-pieces held together by a fairly flimsy narrative.

I don't expect this movie to be as good, but I don't think they're slaughtering a sacred cow either. Now if someone remakes The Exorcist...
 

seun

Horror Man
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
9,709
Reaction score
2,054
Age
48
Location
uk
Website
www.lukewalkerwriter.com
My thoughts on remakes are pretty simple. If they have to remake films (and I've yet to work out why - other than for the money - when Christ knows how many scripts for new films are binned in place of remakes), then remake ones which were crap. NOES isn't a classic in the same way that The Exorcist is, but it's a decent and effective horror film overshadowed by shite sequels. It didn't need remaking.

Just because a film is getting on a bit shouldn't mean it's not worth watching.
 

brainstorm77

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2006
Messages
14,627
Reaction score
2,057
To be honest, I think they're banking on the "I wonder how it'll compare" crowd. I agree that it's an unnecessary remake. The story's been told and there are no surprises - only comparison to the original and special effects.

This.
 

ChaosTitan

Around
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
15,463
Reaction score
2,886
Location
The not-so-distant future
Website
kellymeding.com
*shrug* I didn't really. I thought Freddy was too cartooney, and Paperhouse did the whole dream thing much better, even if it was 4 years later. He came for you in your dreams, but other than that, it was still pretty much the same 80's slasher crap I never liked to begin with. And it was mainstream Hollywood horror. So I really don't get why people are so defensive about mainstream Hollywood remaking it. That goes double for Friday the 13th, too.

Your experience, though, doesn't negate the fact that in 1984, NOES was an original and novel take on the growing slasher genre. It hadn't been done before and it did scare a lot of people.

The first time I saw "Jaws" I didn't find it all that scary, but that doesn't mean a whole lot of people weren't terrified to go swimming after seeing that movie.
 

Celia Cyanide

Joker Groupie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
15,479
Reaction score
2,295
Location
probably watching DARK KNIGHT
Your experience, though, doesn't negate the fact that in 1984, NOES was an original and novel take on the growing slasher genre. It hadn't been done before and it did scare a lot of people.

The first time I saw "Jaws" I didn't find it all that scary, but that doesn't mean a whole lot of people weren't terrified to go swimming after seeing that movie.

The fact that people found it scary does not make it blasphemy to remake it.

Again, I basically liked it. And while I understand the ending was not Wes Craven's decision, I think it somewhat negates what made the movie interesting in the first place. Suddenly, all the rules and logic and therefore, plot, fly out the window.

I will admit that I have a bias against mainstream 80's slasher crap because I believe it is a large part of why people think horror is garbage.
 

Cyia

Rewriting My Destiny
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
19,290
Reaction score
5,743
Location
Brillig in the slithy toves...
I quite like the original, except for the stupid, tacked on, ending.

I think I was like 9 when I saw the original, so I can't remember. What was the tacked on ending?

(FWIW, I always thought the best "chill factor" with NOES was the creepy child voice singing the "One, two" chant over while the bloody-wheeled tricycle rolled on its own across the floor.)
 

dgiharris

Disgruntled Scientist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
6,735
Reaction score
1,834
Location
Limbo
I agree, NOES is not the sacred cow that Exorcist is.

Usually, I'm not opposed to remakes. I just believe that if you are going to remake something then damn it, it should be better than the original.

Too many of these hollywood remakes can't hold a candle to the originals.

And from what I've heard, NOES is one such remake. I was going to see it today, but now i'm thinking I'll just wait until it hits Redbox for a dollar.

Mel...
 

Jcomp

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
5,352
Reaction score
1,422
I think I was like 9 when I saw the original, so I can't remember. What was the tacked on ending?

(FWIW, I always thought the best "chill factor" with NOES was the creepy child voice singing the "One, two" chant over while the bloody-wheeled tricycle rolled on its own across the floor.)

The tacked on ending was where it all seems to have been resolved, Freddy's been abolished because Nancy stopped being scared of him (I always thought that climax was lame as well), and then they threw in an ending of Nancy is leaving in a car with her friends in the morning only to realize Freddy's still alive when he somehow takes control of the car and drags her mom through the front door window.

From what I've read thus far, this remake was kinda lame. This girl I go to work with said she loved it, but I don't trust her taste in movies at all, plus she's about 11 months pregnant and if the movie wasn't scary enough to finally force her into labor on the spot, it must be lacking somewhere...
 

Zoombie

Dragon of the Multiverse
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
40,775
Reaction score
5,948
Location
Some personalized demiplane
My problem with this movie is that its being produced by the fucking Antichrist.

Anything he touches has to be tainted by his foul presence...
 

Toothpaste

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 18, 2006
Messages
8,745
Reaction score
3,097
Location
Toronto, Canada
Website
www.adriennekress.com
Remaking something that well known is just setting yourself up for failure....


I dunno. The most recent STAR TREK did okay.

I don't think there's anything wrong with making a remake so long as there's a purpose to it. I can't see this movie, and never saw the original, but it sounds to me they are doing something along the lines of the PSYCHO remake, as in basically keeping the scenes exactly the same (though PSYCHO was a shot for shot remake). To me, that's just odd. And pointless.

But remakes can work, and can work well. The person running the show just have to know what he/she is doing.