Reviews

A Nightmare on Elm Street

2

Freddy got fingered…

Once upon a time, pizza-faced dream paedo Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) wrecked the circadian rhythms of an entire generation in Wes Craven’s 1984 classic. But having dipped his razor glove into TV (Freddy’s Nightmares), 3D (Freddy’s Dead) and Camp Crystal Lake (Freddy Vs Jason), not to mention homosexual metaphor (Freddy’s Revenge), post-modernism (New Nightmare) and self-parody (Dream Warriors/Master/Child) where else was there to go?

According to producer Michael Bay’s Platinum Dunes – already responsible for po-faced reprises of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Friday The 13th – the answer’s backwards. More remake than redux, Nightmare 2010 is an uninspired reassembly of the original’s best bits (the ceiling roll, the bath attack, the walking body bag, the bed haemorrhage), block by tedious block. As before, Nancy (Rooney Mara) and her Vicodin-eyed Gap model chums are being menaced in their sleep by Freddy (Jackie Earle Haley), but could he be the same mild-mannered janitor who used to live under the kindergarten (no kidding) until accusations of sexual impropriety (hmmm really?) got him burned to a crisp by their parents?

In a word, yes. But it’s not the same. Haley’s a fine, Oscar-nominated actor, but his wonk-faced fish-man make-up, Forrest Gump drawl and lazy backstory do the character no favours, and upping the child abuse element confuses the issue – are we supposed to be scared or disgusted? Director Samuel Bayer (a pop-promo veteran, naturally) conjures a handful of slick reality/dreamworld transitions, three or four crudely effective jump-scares and a small reservoir of gore. But these are superficial distractions in a hotchpotch whose most unlikely plot point ends up the most pertinent. Turns out it is possible to fall asleep with your eyes open. Who knew?

Verdict:

Liked the original but wished it was unfeasibly generic with a touch more paedophilia? Bingo…

Film Details

User Reviews

    • Dominc

      May 7th 2010, 17:51

      4

      This was a good film whats up with the bad reviews ok its not as good as the old one.

      Alert a moderator

    • mlink73

      May 9th 2010, 18:50

      1

      I was looking forward, being a fan of the original but also open to remakes I really gave it a fair chance, but I left the theatre absolutely disappointed. Plot holes and some ideas taken over from the original that didn't even make sense with the new setup. The whole movie feels rushed and just made for a quick cash in with a brand name.....I can't recommend it.

      Alert a moderator

    • kaysad

      May 26th 2010, 9:50

      1

      really bad. really really bad.

      Alert a moderator

    • NMM1310

      Jul 19th 2010, 17:27

      3

      Being a fan of horror movies and not been born around the time of the first nightmare on elm street movies, I was looking forward to this remake haveing enjoyed The Remake of Friday The 13th (2009) from Platium Dunes and Michael Bay (Produced Both. I enjoyed this movie for what it is (which is a slasher movie) (Gore,Blood and violence) But have a few problems with the film as i feel it should have been a little longer and tell the story about the others from the school that had been attacked by freddy (having only a small part in the movie when Nancy (Rooney Mara) Looking for a link between people that freddy has attacked. Another Point which i feel was a little poor was the ending to the movie (Spoiler) When you think freddy is dead but jumps threw a miror in Nancys House to attack her mom and the movie ending like this. This the same problem i have with friday the 13th (2009) when you thick jason is dead and then he comes out of the water to attack the survivors. Which i think would only work if they make second film. Good things about the movie are that it does have some jump moments and the kills have a lot of gore. See this if you are a horror movie fan like me as it is good for what it is but dont expect any award wining.

      Alert a moderator

    • zakmccormack

      Jul 20th 2010, 18:40

      2

      Being a such big fan of the original films I was a little sceptical when I sat down to watch this. There was so many things wrong with this poor excuse for a movie. First question, What the hell have they done with Freddy's face? I mean that just looks terrible. The acting was predictably poor as is most crappy horror films these days. There was only 2 bits that made me jump throughout the whole film and they came in the first 25-30 minutes. Also no one on Earth can come anywhere near close to creating the sheer terror put across by original Freddy Robert Englund. All in all pretty poor film

      Alert a moderator

    • CreativePen

      Aug 8th 2010, 16:58

      1

      I’ve not been sleeping too well lately. That was until I slipped on the Michael Bay produced remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street. Since then, I’ve slept like a baby. This isn’t perhaps the greatest endorsement of a film which centres on the fear of slumber. Mr Bay’s production company is in the process of remaking every classic horror it can lay its hands on. With the odd exception, I’ve been largely under whelmed by the output. True to form, this contemporary re-imagining looks as though it’s been dragged backwards through a petrol station. Each frame of the movie drips with oily colours. Through the squint of strained eyes, I could just about make out what was going on and I can tell you, there wasn’t much. A Nightmare on Elm Street stays true to the majority of horror remakes, turning up the gore factor to 11. That’s not to say that the 1984 version was without bloody jolts. But director, Samuel Bayer, soaks his re-imagining in so much tomato sauce that it washes away the subtle subtext of the original. The story borrows heavily from the Wes Craven version. A band of teenagers – yes they are attractive – all suffer from the same recurring nightmare. Deep within the surreal world of their dreams they are stalked by Freddy Krueger – a disfigured killer wielding a knife-fingered glove. Along with Hellraiser maestro Clive Barker, Craven reinvented the horror genre during the 80s. A Nightmare on Elm Street explored surrealism through an architecture of dreams. Cast your mind back to the scene of a demented tongue bursting through the phone, or the long-armed menace of Freddy Krueger stalking his prey down a darkened alleyway. Bayer’s remake restages a number of key moments from the first film, but the fantastical is quickly consumed by an overflowing blood bath. A Nightmare on Elm Street is nastier than the original, but in all the wrong ways. Jackie Earle Haley’s Freddy Krueger bears little resemblance to Robert Englund’s suitably over-the-top portrayal. Englund delivered an array of witty one-liners before making a porkpie out of his victims. Haley, on the other hand, has little to play with. Consequently, the Bogey Man is dead. And what’s with Haley’s vocal choices? He sounds like Christian Bail’s Batman, crossed with Barry White after smoking a 20 pack. His baritone is deeper than the Atlantic Ocean. The remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street was more disappointing than an empty Christmas stocking. While it has a few jolts, it fails to pack the punch and invention of the original. One thing’s for sure though: if you’re having trouble sleeping, A Nightmare on Elm Street will knock you out faster than a piano to the head. Time to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzzz

      Alert a moderator

    • DonisFun

      Nov 11th 2010, 22:06

      1

      I hated this remake, it was dreadful. I can see the appeal to the new fans but as I have grown up on a staple diet of 80's horror movies and this was f@cking woeful even the dream sequences were c**p compared to the original! Seriously who is allowing these shoddy remakes to be released when loads of other quality european, and far eastern films end up straight to dvd, and this excuse of a film gets a general cinema release.... no justice at all... I'd love a sit down with Michael Bay and tell him straight.

      Alert a moderator

    • jimb45

      Jan 23rd 2011, 3:31

      5

      This will never be as good as the original movie. I thought this was a good movie but will never be as good as the original movie. accutane lawsuit

      Alert a moderator

    • lukejt02

      Mar 6th 2011, 14:18

      3

      An ok remake, it's not as good as it could have been, withe the last couple of nightmare movies turning freddy into a joke and a parody of himself this was a real chance to make him scary again. It halted worked, Jackie Earl Haley is excellent as freddy and has helped make him menacing again, but the clear syncing issues with the voice and the rest if the movie ruin his performance. The best thing about the movie is the nightmare sequences, the effects are stunning as I'd freddy's face! But it was still good up see a new freddy movie, and if they decide to make a sequel I hope they explore freddy a bit more and leave the teenagers, who clearly look late twenties, as fodder to be sliced and diced to his hearts content!

      Alert a moderator

Most Popular