April 30, 2010
Read Jeff Otto's review
Out of all the 80s slashers, A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET has a unique edge on its ilk. Not necessarily because it’s the best one, but because Freddy Kruger actually has a personality and a voice. He’s a killer that is both sinister and playful, and toys with his prey before dispatching them in whatever disturbing fashion he desires. So, after all the offerings that Platinum Dunes has given us so far, it only makes sense that they finally enter the dream world with their take on Wes Craven’s most famous creation simply because he’s the last of the big, early slasher icons that they haven’t tampered with yet. And while NIGHTMARE is one of their better efforts, it’s still a subpar film with some great ideas that just don’t quite work.
NIGHTMARE’s best attribute is that it’s tonally in-check with the original and A NEW NIGHTMARE: dark and dreary, with a straight-faced approach to horror. PD’s remake isn’t a fun film at all; in fact, there are only two or three intentional jokes throughout the film. Freddy is changed from a child killer to just a child molester (yes, I know Craven originally wrote him as a molester but it was changed before shooting), and while that does fit in with the cold and grimy feel of the film, it pretty much makes him impossible to root for. It’s not that killing a child is something you wouldn’t frown upon, it’s just that horror films – especially slasher franchises – have proven that audiences will root for killers again and again, regardless of how old their victims are. But are people going to get behind a quasi-playful, occasionally pun-spewing child molester for one or more films? I will say this, though: I think it’s very ballsy to reinvent a beloved franchise character and make him impossible to root for.
This also brings up the glove, Freddy’s iconic trademark. In the original film, he uses it to kill children and before the opening credits, he’s shown constructing the glove. Later on, we’re shown the glove again in the real world, as Nancy’s mothers takes it out of the furnace to prove to her that Freddy isn’t a concern anymore. In other words, the glove transitions from the real world into the dream world. Here, the glove has no connection; it’s like Freddy went to the dream world Home Depot and constructed himself one off-screen. While alive, he was a gardener at a preschool and is never shown wearing the glove, nor did he really have a reason to; he never killed anyone while he was alive. We have a flimsy back story given during a school lecture, where a teacher discusses how Medieval weapons and torture devices were all uniquely constructed, and then we’re shown a picture of one that vaguely resembles the famous claws. We’re also shown molestation victims with claw marks on their clothes and skin. So, that brings up the question: If he was just molesting kids, for what purpose did he construct the glove for as a human? Was it just so he could leave proof that he was pedophile and get caught? He’s never shown with the glove as a human, so for all we know, he was using the hand rake from the beginning to scratch the kids. I think what it comes down to is that screenwriters Wesley Strick and Eric Heisserer figured that Kruger is so well-known that they didn’t need to explain the glove. Their lazy approach would be akin to showing Jason in a FRIDAY THE 13TH movie going from wearing a sack over his head to a hockey mask without any explanation of where he got the new accessory from.
Story wise, the remake follows the original’s beats pretty closely. There are a few variations (it’s updated for the 2000s), but it’s basically the same formula: dream, death scene, repeat. If anything, I would say that the film moves along at a much brisker pace that many of the sequels yet, at the same time, it manages to be somewhat boring. During the first 45 minutes, there’s essentially no story progression; it’s just dreams and killing without much explanation. Only when there are two characters left halfway through the second act are any explanations given. Once the story does get going, it goes full steam but there are three really excellent ideas presented that never reach their full potential. In fact, they’re so great, it makes me wish I could’ve seen a movie where all of them play a huge prominent role.
(Beginning Of Spoilers)
The first is the idea of micronaps. Micronaps are 2-5 minute periods of time when you fall asleep without really knowing it, which cause you to wake with a startle. In the original, we got entertaining, playful scenes such as Freddy sticking his tongue through a phone. In the remake, we get Quentin (Kyle Gallner) and Nancy (Rooney Mara) talking about going out on a date and then Freddy shows up and makes them swerve off the road. The guy has control over dreams; he’s not a crossing guard. Even taking into account this new interpretation, Freddy should be running around doing all sorts of crazy, inventive stuff. Yet, he never manages to do anything unexpected.
The second deals with the character of Marcus Yeon, played by Aaron Yoo. His character has a video blog site that Nancy comes across, where he describes his nightmares and sleep deprivation. On the wall of his room is a giant “nightmare map,” which one would assume is a map of the nightmare world in which Freddy resides. Unfortunately, the idea never comes into play. It just sits there in background, taunting you with how cool it would be to have Nancy and Quentin venture into the dream world with it and get the upper hand against Freddy. Another quirk with this scene deals with the uploading of Marcus’ final video blog. It’s very obvious that Freddy kills him at the end of his last video, so who posted it? Don’t you have to hit an upload button?
The third, and biggest, wasted opportunity is one that deals with Freddy’s guilt. The question of whether he really was a child molester or not is brought up later on in the film and presents a very interesting dilemma; unfortunately, the question is answered 15 minutes later. For a question that’s as significant as that, there should be more doubt and discussion about the idea in the film itself. Personally, I would have loved to see the whole film based around this idea and it would’ve blown my mind if he had been innocent and he was knocking off the children to spite their parents. And while I won’t hold it against the film that it didn’t go my way, I will say that it is rather pointless to bring up a huge idea like that and then quickly dispel the notion in a matter of minutes.
(End Of Spoilers)
Scenes done in homage to the original don’t quite resonate like they should, instead just seeming like a vastly inferior version of something that was done better more than 25 years earlier. The wall stretching scene’s CGI is laughable and doesn’t have the organic, textured look of the original. And Tina’s death from the original, which had her being slashed mid-air and thrown around her bedroom, is much tamer and has far less arterial spray involved. The one that holds true – which I’m sure was unintentional – is the bad acting of Nancy’s mother, played by Connie Britton. The argument between her and Nancy in her office had me in stitches, with their banter boiling down to, “You’re lying! Are not! Are too!”. The acting of all the teens are acceptable for the most part, with Rooney Mara being the most monotone and yawn-worthy of them all. Jackie Earle Haley is the stand-out, and he plays an excellent Rorschach… I mean, Freddy. He plays both the human and dream version of Kruger distinctly different and well.
Despite a cool scene or three and the fact that it’s infinitely less frustrating than FRIDAY THE 13TH, A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET never reaches the plateau that it so earnestly tries to reach. It’s chock-full of interesting ideas and it looks nice thanks to Samuel Bayer’s grunge aesthetic, but a worthy trip to Slumberland this is not.
READ MORE
January 12, 2009
Bloody-Disgusting already broke the news that Brad Fuller and Andrew Form's Platinum Dunes are set to follow their Friday the 13th remake with a relaunch of A Nightmare on Elm Street. Although they are still in the early stages of scripting, we thought it was the perfect time to offer up our picks for the cast of the ELM STREET remake. Feel free to post some of your suggestions below!
digg_media = 'news';
digg_topic = 'movies';
Casting the Nightmare on Elm Street Remake
The picks below are wishful thinking of course We all know chances are strong that most of the teen roles will go to the usual run-of-the-mill offshoots from The O.C., Gossip Girl and the like, but if we were making the choices, well then, you'd surely have a better movie. But I digress. If nothing else, let's hope some deep thought goes into the crucial roles of Freddy and Nancy. Botching those could mean this one winds up more like the crappy Amityville Horror remake than the respectable Texas Chainsaw reworking. Knifed-fingers crossed!
Freddy Krueger
Jackie Earle Hayley - Yes, it's true, Hayley played a child molestor in his career-resurging role as Ronnie J. McGorvey in Little Children, but that's not the only reason he's the perfect man to reinvigorate the legendary dream killer. Hayley's career is on the upswing and, let's be realistic here, he is pretty creepy looking! The footage we've seen of him so far in Watchman as Rorschach looks pretty bad-ass and he just finished shooting a role as a mental patient for Martin Scorsese in Shutter Island. Good enough for Marty, good enough for Freddy Krueger. Hayley is the perfect choice to create a darker, more maniacal, scarier Freddy like the character that was first envisioned by Craven in the early `80s.
Alternate - Adrien Brody
Nancy Thompson
Amanda Seyfried - Considering the current crop of young starlets coming down the Hollywood pipeline, it would be a big challenge to find an actress with the wholesome innocence of Langenkamp. Amanda Seyfried (from Mamma Mia! and HBO's Big Love) certainly has the right look and those big innocent eyes that might just pull it off. Hopefully producers Brad Fuller and Andrew Form will keep the original's spirit in mind in this respect rather than opting for the standard choice of another model-turned-actress that "impressed" a producer.
Alternate - Dakota Fanning
Marge Thompson
Marcia Cross - Cross has already done the stumbling drunk thing a bit as the tightly wound Bree Hodge on Desperate Housewives. Plus she'd be able to channel her Melrose past by hamming it up in homage to Ronee Blakely. And while we certainly all have a nostalgic affection for Blakely's overdone performance from the first Elm Street, it would be nice to see Cross balance things a bit and tone down the hamminess just a tad.
Alternate - Drew Barrymoore
Lt. Thompson
Josh Brolin - Sure, this one is probably a longshot after Brolin went legit in Coen Bros. and Oliver Stone flicks, but wouldn't it be great? Going through the current list of middle-aged Hollywood actors, it's hard to find many with the right level of grizzled toughness Saxon possessed. Most of the guys out there today are too pretty to picture as tough guy cop fathers with a drinking problem. Maybe they can just de-age Saxon like X-Men 3 and use him again?
Alternate: Bill Moseley
Rod Lane
Jamie Bell - Taking on the tough guy wrongly accused of Tina's murder could be another step towards shedding his Billy Elliot past after impressive turns last year in Jumper and Defiance. The audition is simple: greased hair, black leather jacket and reading the line "Hey, up yours with a twirling lawnmower" without so much as a smirk.
Alternate: Lucas Black
Glen Lantz
Unknown Future Hollywood A-lister - Considering that then unknown Johnny Depp went on to become one of the most accomplished and beloved actors in Hollywood, the pressure is certainly on for the actor that winds up stepping into these shoes. Logan Lerman was great in 3:10 to Yuma and managed to save face in the hokey Number 23. Living up Depp's career might be a stretch, but at least he'd do the role proud.
Alternate: Young Johnny Depp lookalike contest winner
Tina Gray
Lindsay Lohan - Come on, am I the only one that wants to see this busty party girl thrashed around in a pool of blood on an upside down ceiling? I have issues, you say? Admit it, you got a little excited thinking about it... Whoever plays this femme slash fodder won't be long for this world anyway. If the remake is any good, it could be a career jolt similar to Drew Barrymoore's brief death scene in the first Scream.
Alternate: Mischa Barton
READ MORE
