Ryan Rotten: Rob, our readers are getting downright rabid about Platinum Dunes'
Nightmare on Elm Street. Rabid, I tell ya! There's a whole lot of fuss over this movie, especially since that AICN test screening review. And I'll reveal this, when I check our top stories on a weekly basis, Nightmare always ranks in the top five. Go figure, because it seems to have a lot of haters. But site traffic is telling me even the haters are interested in it to some degree. Unless they're just fascinated to watch the train wreck it could possibly be. Without a doubt, it's the film to watch for next spring, and I'm curious as hell to see what they've done with Freddy Krueger, but that early review has me concerned. You and I are both children of Krueger, having been raised on the series, and since some of Shock's readers have asked us how we felt, I thought this would be the place to spew some thoughts.
RobG: I'm trying to remain cautiously optimistic, because I really, really loved that trailer. I understand die-hard fans' concerns with anything Platinum Dunes related, and I, for the most part, agree. The only remake they've produced that I kind of dug was the first
Texas Chainsaw Massacre.
Friday The 13th was okay, but considering the tools they had, it should have been a much, much better movie. The drastic 60% drop after opening weekend proved that people wanted better. Had it been the kick-ass
Friday The 13th we were all waiting for, we would've lined up and seen it three times in theaters.
With a few more months to tweak, I'm hoping
Nightmare is more in the vein of
Texas as opposed to
Friday. And by that, I mean I hope they capture the best bits of the
Nightmare series and channel it into one movie. With eight movies-worth of ideas, a TV series and tons of comics, there's no reason not to make an awesome movie. Now, the real concern for fans is the fact that Robert Englund is no longer playing Freddy Krueger. What do you think about recasting with Jackie Earle Haley? Can Freddy truly only be portrayed by one actor as most are arguing?
Ryan: Before we get to casting… Please,
Friday The 13th was a
Friday the 13th film. I got nailed to the wall for my favorable review, but I stand by it. In the context of the series, the film was what it should have been - although the kills could have been punched up. It was far better than any
Friday entry after Part 6. I think Platinum Dunes did fine with it.
Nightmare is a different beast and needs to be more than a fun body count film and that trailer - now that I've seen it a few times and have processed it - doesn't do much for me. And the reason why is it plays like a greatest hits of the first film. I know they've got to market it to a new generation, but I think they should have celebrated the new stuff they brought to the table - with the exception of the shots of Krueger being hunted down by the parents. So, I'm skeptical about the whole idea of rebooting it now. If you're going to do it, give me something fresh to chew on. See, I'm open to a new
Nightmare film.
I've told you this before, we're living in a time where the bogeymen we've grown up with are getting face lifts as those bogeymen of an older generation - the Universal monster kid generation - saw Frankenstein, Dracula and the Wolfman get revitalized during the Hammer period. We're not necessarily going to agree with the results, but that's what is happening and I'm keeping an open mind.
Getting to your query about Jackie Earle Haley as Krueger, I've been a supporter since day one. I loved him in
Little Children and thought he was a great Rorschach in
Watchmen. That man is incredibly talented and can bring some decent menace to the role, however, seeing someone else with the glove and sweater on is bizarre. I've used the analogy before, but Krueger was such an iconic dude to me growing up, it's like coming home, and in a strange
Invaders from Mars-like instance, finding your parents are not your parents anymore. They're familiar to you, but something's off. I'm just glad Haley doesn't come across like some cheap haunted maze Freddy knock-off.
RobG: It's funny you make the Hammer reference in comparison to our current crop of remakes, because I always use that one too. Imagine if there was Internet during the Hammer period? People would've gone nuts! Alas, even though I grew up on the series and I love Englund's portrayal as much as the next fan, I'm all for Jackie Earle Haley.
I think it's interesting that we're at the point where we have a new Freddy, Jason and Michael Myers. Inevitably there's going to be a third actor playing Freddy eventually. And think about it, who's better as Dracula? Bela Lugosi? Christopher Lee? Or Gary Oldman? I think they're all great Draculas! Much like Derek Mears was the best part of the
Friday The 13th remake, I feel Jackie will be the standout for Nightmare.
Now, with that said, I need to argue with a lot of the fan's nitpicking at little details. "The sweater's not the same!" Why? Because it doesn't have full red sleeves like in the original? Well, then by that rationale, the sweater wasn't the same for
Nightmare's two though eight then when it was fully striped! "He doesn't look like Freddy, he looks like a burn victim!" Well, yeah! He is a burn victim! And he's talking the way he talks in that trailer because as a burn victim, he no longer has lips. Like you said before, we don't want the exact same movie as the original, it's got to be different, so I'm okay with Freddy being different and I have faith that Haley will deliver something memorable.
I think for the next trailer, Platinum Dunes really needs to focus on the new aspects of their movie to win over the skeptics. You got a good look at Krueger on your set visit. What are your thoughts?
Ryan: Well, I'm still under embargo from talking about anything I saw on set - so you're not prying anything out of me, sir. The bickering over the sweater, to me, is tantamount to the fans getting riled up over Jason Voorhees' coat or hair...or running - even though he jumped into a sprint during the pre-Hodder days. It's a bit ridiculous. The memory seems to get a bit foggy for some when they're so riled up with vitriol. I'm not going to make any damn judgment calls over "how Freddy talks" based on that trailer - he says one line. However, I can certainly see the argument for the makeup, even though Freddy's look got increasingly sloppy as the sequels went on. Jackie Earle's makeup is answering to this overwhelming need for realism in every horror film now - there's no sense of "fantasy" to the design, although I'm sure director Samuel Bayer will create some interesting dream sequences. You've got a wicked hard-on for that guy. Platinum Dunes courted him for the
Near Dark remake, now they got him for
Nightmare. But I'm not sure if he's got the chops for the material.
RobG: Whoa, whoa...a wicked hard-on is a bit much! For me as a kid, the two things that left the biggest impression on me was the first
Nightmare On Elm Street movie and Nirvana's music video for "Smells Like Teen Spirit." And it just seems ironic - yet fitting - that the director of that video would go on the helm a remake of my most impressionable horror movie. Look - again, I'm cautiously optimistic, but I'm not as dismissive as most fans have been just because he comes from a music video background.
If you take a look at some of Bayer's videos such as David Bowie's "The Heart's Filthy Lesson" or The Smashing Pumpkins "Bullet With Butterfly Wings", he can definitely visually illustrate a cool, dream-like aesthetic. It makes sense to me that the Platinum crew would pick him considering the look of some of his videos.
One of my biggest concerns are things we're hearing story-wise. For example, this rumor that in the remake, it's only implied that Fred Krueger was a child molester. The trailer certainly makes it seem like he's possibly wrongfully accused - the bit with him screaming out "I didn't do anything!" But the fact that he was a despicable human being before being burned is inherent in the character and important to why he becomes the monster he does. So, I'm nervous about that. But at the same time, by remaking this, they have the chance to fix the ending to the original. I've heard fans refer to the first Nightmare as a "classic" and say things like "how dare you remake it?!" I agree that it's a great, but it's far from a perfect movie as even the filmmakers will tell you! Between Wes Craven and Bob Shaye not ever truly deciding on how that first movie should've ended properly, I've never found it satisfying. (Has anyone?) Hell, the sequels just sort of ignored it. So while I'm sure the ending of this remake will set it up for an obvious sequel, I just hope it's improved upon from the original.
Ryan: Well, you're now treading "what's the criteria for remaking a film" waters. And I don't believe for a second that the original
Nightmare was flawed enough to go and redo it, but I see your point with the ending, however, I've always accepted it as bleak denouement. Nancy didn't eradicate the evil and Krueger's power lives on. Of course, the sequels did whatever they wanted. The question of whether Krueger 2010 is a child molester or a child killer and what's more effective is a pretty damn hilarious argument you'll only find in our circles. Yet, those are the kinds of creative changes I'm looking for - whether I like them or not. If this new Krueger is a wrongfully accused dude, now there's something we've never seen before in the franchise: An ounce of sympathy for the guy, which harks back to the Universal monsters in some respects. It'll drive the die-hard fans nuts, but if you're going to update a film don't give me surface level changes. Take a cue from Carpenter's
The Thing and Cronenberg's
The Fly. Make the material mean something different, offer it another level of potency.
RobG: Wow. I actually was against the idea of any of our modern bogeymen being at all sympathetic, but you just reminded me that Frankenstein, the Wolfman and even the Creature (especially in
The Creature Walks Among Us) were all sympathetic monsters. Bottom line, as a life-long die-hard Freddy Krueger fan, I'll be there opening night with the best of intentions. I like the director and I like Jackie as the new Freddy. However, Platinum Dunes hasn't had the best track record, at least in terms of my own personal tastes. So, all I can hope for is to be pleasantly surprised when the flick opens in April. Regardless of if it's good or bad, successful or not, praised or reviled, nothing can change the fact that I can always walk over to my DVD shelf and have a double-feature of
Nightmare's one and three.
Dream Warriors will always be my favorite
Nightmare!
Ryan: You want to talk about flaws - look at
Nightmare 3 ("I'm a wizard in my dreams! Woo-hoo!" - not an actual quote, but what the f**k), still, I dig that one, too. Well, I'll be right there with you in April when the remake opens. I'm sure we'll have plenty of notes to trade then...
Comments
Posted by: Freddy K on November 9, 2009 at 16:54:20
Great discussion. But, editing note...you don't need an apostrophe in the words "sequels" and "Nightmares". Apostrophes are NOT necessary to pluralize words such as those.
Posted by: Ryan Rotten, Managing Editor on November 9, 2009 at 17:05:08
Correction made, thanks. Glad you enjoyed the piece.
Posted by: kruegerdude on November 9, 2009 at 17:07:16
I was really hoping that they wouldn't make Freddy a child molester in the remake, but it's been pretty much confirmed. People argue that he always was or that it was implied in the original series, but I strongly disagree. This is my franchise. No other horror film has had the same effect on me as the Nightmare series. My confusion is where the glove comes in to play with the remake. In the original story he used the glove to murder children, but if he never murdered children in the reboot, why does he have the iconic glove? That glove serves no other purpose than to kill. I'll remain optimistic about this movie, but April 30th will be decision day.
Posted by: Ultimo Lantern on November 9, 2009 at 17:19:11
I thought that Freddy was supposed to be an actual nightmare and not a burn victim. The realism kinda defeats the purpose of how far a persons' nightmares can go.
But train-wreck or not, I'll be there to watch it.
Posted by: robg on November 9, 2009 at 17:21:09
Well, in the first movie they always refer to him as this man who's "horribly burned". He looks pretty charred in the first flick.
Posted by: Ultimo Lantern on November 9, 2009 at 17:28:02
What I meant was that after he was burned, his nightmare form was that look that was shown in the first movie. The current and "realistic" new look shouldn't carry over into the nightmares that Freddy runs. I just don't see why every re-make has to be realistic now. Where is the fun in that?
Posted by: Morley on November 9, 2009 at 17:39:52
I'm totally with RobG on this one, Dream Warriors rocks!!! There is a lot of good attatched to this film, didn't realise that the director also did the Coma White video, one of my favourites of all time. Kind of entertaining that this plays the day after Flash Forward day. Yes, I've just finished watching Flash Forward, lol. I'm keeping optimistic about this, despite the fact my beloved Robert Englund has been replaced...but since Little Children, I too am thinking that Jackie Earle Hayley can pull this off. :)
Posted by: ARTaylor on November 9, 2009 at 17:45:15
Honestly I thought the original Freddy was a little too silly at times. There's this one scene where he chops his fingers off just to freak the girl out. While it is creepy it doesn't seem to make much sense. From the remake I've always wanted to see a Freddy that was closer to the New Nightmare version. I think that Freddy had this greater morbid sense of humor and more vicious than the original. It's the only sequel I enjoyed. Demon-Freddy kept that creepy sense of humor but took it to a darker level. That's what I want to see from Haley.
I think the idea that he wasn't actually a molester could bring an interesting dynamic to the story. Instead of getting revenge on people he's wronged already it's getting revenge on people who wronged him. It's no longer the righteous parents that stop the monster but an overzealous mob that weren't thinking clearly. And instead of the rather stupid idea of search warrant not being properly signed it's possibly that the police didn't have the evidence to keep him. It would really change the dynamic of the character and the story. I think it would be more interesting than if he was a molester like the original.
In the end all I care about is if I enjoy it. I like the original but I don't care if all the details are exactly the same. I didn't not like Star Trek because they didn't have Kirk's brother that made one appearance in the original series, that Pike didn't command the ship longer, or they destroyed Vulcan. I didn't like it because it wasn't a Star Trek story. Now on the other hand I quite enjoyed the remake of Friday the 13th because I felt it was a Friday story. As long as it's faithful in spirit to the original I'll be happy.
Posted by: Ziggy on November 9, 2009 at 17:46:37
"He looks like a burn victim"
Freddy died in the fire, how many times do you people need to hear that before you understand? He should not look like a burn victim who survived, he's all scarred up. How do you heal if you are dead? People talk up that characteristic like it's the main reason to reboot the series and they are just fcking wrong.
And Friday the 13th was terrible. Like Amityville remake, hitcher, and the rest of PD's remakes.
Posted by: justin on November 9, 2009 at 17:49:38
I don't know who RobG is, but some of his responses make him sound like a plant from the studio.
Posted by: robg on November 9, 2009 at 18:04:07
Justin - I can assure you I'm not a plant. I co-created Icons Of Fright 5 years ago, have written for FANGORIA and now write for SHOCK.
I made it clear that I do NOT like any of Platinum Dunes movies expect for the first CHAINSAW and even that is just OK.
I'm optimistic because I'm a huge fan of both Jackie and Sam Bayer and I hope they're influence is strong enough to make a good movie.
I can't remember the last time I reallllly liked a NIGHTMARE movie, so as a fan I want a good one!
I'm not defending PD's decisions, I'm just pointing out it's silly for fans to nitpick some of the things they are.
But I appreciate your feedback!
Posted by: Tyler Haslett on November 9, 2009 at 18:12:43
So this was two fans debating? No ****in news at all then, and a waste of time to read! You either like it or dont, and its not out yet...
Posted by: Robert Barftleigh Cummings on November 9, 2009 at 18:13:42
They should have me remake this one.
I'd be in all your dreams, you ****-licking *****es! And I'd give you two mother****in cuts of the film.
Burns make-up is real and extra ****ing gritty intense hyper-real ****. Just as it should be. Child molesting is tame - should be but-splitting everyone he gets his clawed hand on. ****, give him TWO ****ing gloves for more carnage and ****.
Posted by: Jason...Lives? on November 9, 2009 at 18:21:25
I appreciate what Platinum Dunes is up to. While I didn't like TCM (the original or the remake), I get that people do and I understand why it works for them. I thought that Amityville was a successful remake insomuch that it's a better film than the original. Friday...could have had more imaginative kills - but it's really well shot, suprisingly well-acted, and fun until my beloved Danielle Panabaker is taken from me.
The issue I have with the Nightmare remake is the script. It's exceeeeedingly mediocre. I don't like any of the characters (Nancy is flat-out annoying), the dialogue veers from being devoid of personality to weakly aping Diablo Cody, and nothing new is brought to the table in terms of story.
In the early goings, it felt like there was a really sinister twist to the material - but four pages (or maybe just two) from the end...it's completely negated. Also - none of the "dream imagery" is very compelling visually (like Ryan, I'm hoping that Bayer brings something to those passages) - and much if it is telegraphed. I hope that these issues were worked out during production. It would not have been impossible to do so.
Posted by: robg on November 9, 2009 at 18:26:45
Tyler Haslett - The title of the article is "Diabolic Debate". Umm... what'd you expect?
Posted by: Freddy K on November 9, 2009 at 18:29:17
ArtTaylor - "Honestly I thought the original Freddy was a little too silly at times. There's this one scene where he chops his fingers off just to freak the girl out. While it is creepy it doesn't seem to make much sense" You're missing the entire point of that brief sequence. It's just like the scene in the school's boiler-room (which actually turns out to be Freddy's lair) where we see Nancy confront Freddy for the first time. IN that scene, Freddy slashes his own chest for Nancy to see. Why does he do these things? Well, first off, as you said...the imagery of him cutting off his own fingers or slashing his chest and green goo spurting or oozing out is both creepy and surreal. But, I always felt the motivation behind Freddy doing it was terrifying, and I believe Wes Craven himself addresses the issue in the DVD commentaries available. If you're dealing with a foe that is so insane that he won't even think twice about mauling himself for his own amusement or to scare you...you're dealing with someone who is just about the most twisted, insane, psychotic person you can imagine. And if they have NO regard for their own well-being...just imagine how little they regard YOUR well-being. If that isn't absolutely terrifying...I don't know what is.
Posted by: Ryan Rotten, Managing Editor on November 9, 2009 at 18:31:15
Tyler, it's an opinion piece. Something to spur conversation, get you to consider things you haven't considered yourself. A place for you to chime in. Let you "think" a bit. Scary, I know. It's a break from the monotony of news. Don't worry, still plenty of news to read around here.
Posted by: Freddy K on November 9, 2009 at 18:38:20
Ryan - Spot on about bringing something new to the dream imagery. I pretty much object to remakes in general...and the only reason I ever feel they're justified is if you are able to IMPROVE on the original (and if the original actually WARRANTED a remake in that it isn't a near-perfect film) film's overall filmmaking. OR...if you're able to bring something incredibly fresh, new, and exciting to the material.
Now, in the case of "Nightmare"...I KNOW some of the fans don't care for the original. But, most "experts", fans, critics, film-goers, etc. will agree that the original film is a masterpiece and classic of modern horror. Even if perhaps half the fans didn't like the ending, I hardly think that it takes away from the story/film enough to say a remake is justified.
But, being that the remake DOES exist and it has been made, I personally was hoping that they would bring something fresh to the imagery of the nightmares themselves. And so far, I see NOTHING in the previews that makes me think they did so; snow in a room, someone balancing on a fence, someone emerging naked from a pool? None of this is ground-breaking or new...and it's not what I hoped for.
BUT...I'm hoping there's more. And I'm hoping to enjoy...let's just say I'm cautiously optimistic.
Posted by: PROZAC-PEDRO on November 9, 2009 at 18:44:41
I can't wait for this film. I have faith this movie will be as good as the rebot of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.
Posted by: mike on November 9, 2009 at 18:57:43
im trying my hardest to give it a shot but so far i just can't they ruined friday for me. im such a huge fan of jason i just don't know how i feel about this, i did like texas but that has been it, and my favorite nightmare besides one is the dream master. but i guess come april i will have my final thoughts on this movie
Posted by: Jason...Lives? on November 9, 2009 at 19:52:29
Mike - they RUINED Friday for you? Really? So...like...Part FIVE didn't do that? Part EIGHT? What was it about Platinum Dunes' Friday foray that turned you off to the series in a way that V's "Fake Jason" or VIII's "Jason takes Vancouver" couldn't manage to do? Was it that the new Friday didn't feature Jason chemically mutating/de-aging back into a child and hoarking up twelve gallons of muddy water?
If so - I'm right there with you, man. **** decent production values, interesting cinematography, and a game cast - give me incomprehesible plot twists and awful effects any day of the week and twice on Sunday (or Friday, as it were).
The NoES trailer already hinted at a nice look for the film - it's the story that doesn't work.
And the sleeves on the sweater. Don't forget the sleeves. HOW COULD THEY??? DAMN THEM!! DAMN FORM, FULLER, AND MICHAEL BAY! THE SLEEVES!! THE SLEEEEEEEVES!!!
Posted by: kiyoshi on November 9, 2009 at 20:22:09
lets remember that all of these remakes are for a new generation of horror fans. Yes i love the old ones but i enjoy the new ones also. its kind of like a remake of a old song. Korn remade "one" it will never compare to the original but they brought a new flavor to it. growing up with the old school horror was great because there was nothing like it at the time. I say keep an open mind and just enjoy it from a entrainment point of view. Its not like we have stock in the film.
Posted by: impfx.com on November 9, 2009 at 21:08:07
It's a bad script.
MY IDEA:
Freddy survives the parents fire bath. He's hospitalized. Nancy's father takes matters into his own hands and kills Freddy. This would explain Freddy's scar tissue and put the focus of revenge on Nancy.
I can deliver a better film and I'd use the right sweater.
BTW: If you support crappy stories and give up your hard earned cash... they will make more crappy stories.
Posted by: bodypuzzle on November 9, 2009 at 21:12:04
Am I the only one that thinks Ryan Rotten is hot?
Posted by: Jaguar on November 9, 2009 at 21:28:44
I thought that the new F-13 was pretty good, all concidered!
But I'm a li'l hesitant to be overly-excited for this remake. If Krueger isn't a child murderer/molester, then I don't see him being really a monster.
You guys made that point, and i'm with that, and that's my big reservation: I don't want to sympathize for Freddy Krueger. He should make me cringe when he's on screen, not go "awww, poor feller!!"
y'know? other than that, i blame the new generations for needing everything to be realistic because of TDK. 'nuff said. bastards! And I'm glad they didn't show us new stuff right away. There's gotta be some surprises, otherwise there won't be any incentive to see this on the big screen.
1 2 3
Add a comment