A Nightmare on Elm Street

must watch ♥️♥️♥️❤️

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) is the remake of the original A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) and is a fantastic one at that. Put aside all your previous biases on remakes and take a good look at this movie. Unlike the horrific Friday the 13th remake, the Elm Street remake managed to actually be scary instead of just plain silly. However this remake is not without its flaws... The Good: The movie manages to be generally creepy, I got the same feeling from this version of Freddy that I did from the original one, a sort of uneasiness from his very presence. Some of the death scenes were really well done also. Kris's death (like Tina's) was executed very well. I found only one thing about the movie that was superior to the original and that was the suspense throughout the entire film, unlike the original the remake had an element in it (i.e. "Micro naps") that made Freddy capable of popping out at any given moment, which was actually quite effective overall. The acting overall was not bad at all, it wasn't amazing but it suits the movie. The Bad: The movie doesn't start off slow; instead of building up suspense it just takes a flying leap into the very basis of the movie. Over half of the times Freddy comes on screen it happens by way of the old sharp music and jump tactic, which I found alright at first but it soon got kind of old and annoying to be honest. Two iconic elements from the first film were executed very poorly. The wall scene from the original was now a very poor CGI version, I hated it and it was completely unnecessary to add it just for the sake of paying homage or whatever they intended on doing, it just looked bad... then again I despise CGI with every fiber of my being. The tub scene was also poorly done; it was simply his hand coming out of the water with again some sharp music to get the squeamish. I still don't care for Freddy's look in this movie even after having a very open mind about it, however his voice far makes up for it. Overall this film is worth seeing, I was a complete skeptic with low expectations going in and the movie managed to be very well done. Robert Englund will always be the true Freddy, but I will accept this as a replacement. The Nightmare formula works to this day and is the scariest concept I have ever witnessed in a movie.

Let me start right off the bat by saying: yes, I was a big fan of NOES in the 80s, I cherish fond memories of watching the first one on VHS when I was 11, saw NOES 4 in theater and every sequel after that. No, I'm not against movie remakes; I actually look forward to them and enjoyed many of them. And even though I love horror films, I'm not a purist (yes, I loved Halloween III- there, I said it!). But come on! It doesn't take a horror fan boy to realize this NOES remake is simply a horrible, horrible experiment gone bad, and NOT in a good way! I can only imagine the brainstorm they must have had when deciding to remake NOES. "People, what can we do to butcher ---- hrrrr ---- redo NOES"? *********** SPOILERS ************* JOE: Oh I know! Let's re-use key scenes from the original film, but with cheesier effects! Better yet, let's just do them with poor CGI instead. DAN: You know, we should do something about replacing the original actor the fans loved so much. Let's use a shorter guy instead, and... oh, while we're at it: make him look like a melted weazle, and feed him cheesy dialogue lines. MARC: Dan, you can't stop there! You know what we should do to make sure the fans really dislike him? Make him a pedophile. DAN: Are you sure Marc? I mean, this is a drastic change... In the original, Freddy was like the image of the boogieman... He killed those kids because he was evil. But there is nothing about ped... MARC: I'm telling you Dan! This will be killer! The crowd will turn cold. JOE: I buy that! Greaaaaaaat idea! Let's push that idea throughout the story. It'll teach them to root for Freddy in the other versions! OK, what else? MARC: Let's use deep and low post-processed digital audio to change Freddy's voice. Oh, and LOTs of reverb. LOOOOOTS of it! Because, it's dreams, you know. Scaaaaaaryyyy! JOE: Awesome! Here's one: the teens should be played by adults. DAN: Wasn't that a complaint from the teens in horror films of the 80s? JOE: You're right. Well, it's like they say: if it ain't broken, don't fix it! ------------------ OK.... all in all, I think you get the drift. Really, I didn't think it was possible to butcher one of the greatest horror icon of the 80s/90s. But they surely succeeded to kill the spirit of Freddy in this version of NOES. Robert, we miss you dearly.

Let me preface this by stating that the haters of this film have been out in full force trashing it before it had even opened for viewing; critics had blasted the "horrible, banal, acting", "hackneyed jokes and predictable scares", and "the inappropriate historical back-story of Krueger". Unlike most of the critical reviewers, I have seen the entire film franchise of Nightmare on Elm Street from part I to Dream Warriors and yes even, Freddy V Jason, and I am here to say with confidence that this film not only does justice to the historical precedents set by the original, but furthers its future existence into the next realm of this new decade. Let's be frank, Freddy needed a new start, an introduction to a whole new generation of dream frightened teenagers. The idea of Freddy is still as fresh as ever and its repackaging was much needed. I feel like the director and the cast did a great job of reinventing the film franchise while also paying homage to past Freddy films. Now, in response to the criticisms': This movie has strong performances by Rooney Mara as Nancy, Kyle Gallner as Quentin, and of course Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy Krueger. I was never a big fan of the original Nancy, but this movie provides great character development of Nancy, and allows the audience an opportunity to gradually sympathize with her, and eventually root for her in the final sequences. It was a strong, underplayed, performance by Rooney Mara. Kyle Gallner almost steals the show as a medicated, emotionally damaged, friend of Nancy. His acting is both tortured and genuine, which is apt for the horror movie. He may turn out to be the "Johnny Depp" of the new Nightmare on Elm Street franchise. Ever since I saw Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschac in Watchmen I have been in love with the guy, and when I heard that he was cast as the new Krueger, I thought there wasn't a more appropriate actor in Hollywood for the role. He is, in a word, perfect. Now, I am not comparing him to Robert Englund, who was masterful as Krueger for all the previous films, but Haley has the potential, in future films, to take the franchise to a new level. The jokes are what make Freddy Kreuger so unique and endearing. Yes, it is kitchy, but they serve a vital role in the film's success, in that periods of brevity allow the audience to catch its collective breath in anticipation of the next scare, which, despite what the critics have wrote, does catch you off guard at times. If there were a recording of these critics' viewing of the film, I'm positive you'd have seen some eyes wide open, mouths gaping, and body shaking from these jokers. As far as the historical back-story goes, it is a serious subject that perhaps should have been dressed down a bit for the film, but in today's era of Rob Zombie's Halloween and the Dark Knight, character development and realistic back stories describing current psychological underpinnings of characters are a necessity in today's age. This is why I believe this film is not only solid, with justice paid to the original, I also believe this franchise has great potential to be treated with some degree of seriousness in terms of the psychological explanations of Freddy's motives. Overall, I gave this film a 9 out of 10 because while there still is room to improve, it is a solidly acted, visually impressive, nicely directed beginning to the Freddy Krueger franchise.

Let me start off by saying i thought this movie was decent. But I expected a lot more. We all know the story of Freddy Krueger. How he got burnt etc. In this one it's the same, but it's the change of Freddy's character that really lost my interest. Jackie Earle Haley is about as best as you can get at playing Freddy Krueger. No one will ever beat Robert Englund. He's just Freddy Krueger! I don't really need to explain the plot, you all know the plot, BUT, let me explain the changes. In the old Nightmare On Elm Street, Freddy Krueger would always mess with people before he killed them. In this one he just kills them and doesn't mess around. Nothing humorous to say, nothing, just kills them. In the original he was a psychopathic killer who hurts children. In this one he's just a pedophile. Loves to screw all the women and girls. To me, that put me off. All this put me off. So Freddy's character changed a lot, but did it work? Not for me. Didn't work for me. All the acting was decent and there's some gory scenes, all in all, not the remake I was expecting and had hoped for. Everything about it is decent, but nothing great. 5/10

I must be the small percent of people who actually enjoyed this movie a lot. I think the biggest problem a lot of people had with the new movie was it wasn't the old franchise. People get certain expectations in their heads when Hollywood comes out with a new movie based on a old franchise and when it doesn't meet those expectations, you better watch out, because no matter what you do, people won't agree with it. As soon as they announced the original actor for Kruger wasn't going to taking up his old role, people should have known this movie was going to take a hit. People were just not going to forgive the fact that Robert Englund was not going to be starring in the film. The original Nightmare on Elm Street movies never took themselves very seriously, they were campy, B-Horror quality films that people learned to love and enjoy. While Kruger was still a murdering horror icon, he was more of a joker, a prankster and a wise cracker then some sort of super villain. I think people also disliked the fact how much more villainous they actually made Kruger. A lot of people disliked the fact they made him a child molester. The reality of it is, even from the old franchise they were planning on making Kruger a child molester, but when a major court case involving an actual child molester began to take trial they didn't want people thinking their movie had anything to do with the actual person on trial and changed Kruger from a child molester to simply a murderer. The reality of it is, as on it's own, this is a good movie. It's unfortunate that there are such die hard fans that they can't even keep an open mind, I thought it was a fantastic movie and I am glad it was produced. Hopefully those negative oldies didn't ruin it for the rest of us, I'd like to see another one.

You knew it wouldn't work. And instead of reaching redundancy with all the other chimer-ins, I'll cut my two cents to just a cent and a half. The new Nancy was completely unappealing and had zero charm. She wasn't cute, she wasn't spunky, and she wasn't a fighter, all three of which were nicely exhibited by Heather Langenkamp in the original. Mara's Nancy doesn't speak up until the last two minutes of the film! Until that point, she reminds one of those nerd girls who hide in the corner at parties, darting their eyes around while clutching a cup of beer, almost daring themselves to take a sip. The shot of her holed-up in her room, bug-eyeing her mother in a low-whisper, speaks volumes. The blonde looked WAY too old to be a high school student, but at least had a hint of conviction to her situation. Of course, she's the "trick" character for the audience. The guys were all Twilight/Jonas Brother facsimiles who seemed stoned half the time; acting was fair, but did not engage. Kills were decent, but most were re-creations with a computer, so there really wasn't anything to add on to them. That bendy, unnatural appearance of dreamscapes and the glove bursting through people is so overused by this point, that it has no punch. The music, at least, borrowed a few chords from the original score (SORELY needed for a flick this lackluster). Finally, Freddy. Instead of doing the usual praising of Englund and ripping of Haley, I'll stick to the basics. Haley is too short, and too slight, to be a threatening villain. During the full body shots, or of him at a distance, it looked like a teenager who hadn't filled out yet was goofing in a rental costume. And, in a sense, his make-up is almost too real. The fact that he looks like a burn victim sort of sends a feeling of unease because of the authentic ones we've seen on the news. Englund's original "pizza" or rubbery appearance made him menacing, but not awkward to look at. You could go on for six years about the voice of choice. Haley's approached a drunken Englishman, stumbling out of the pub, dragging his tone in a haze. Really did reek of a fan-film Freddy getting overmatched by the material. I didn't care about the characters, there was no sense of urgency, and basically, it just very "remakey," like your typical modern-day slasher. Nothing significant or compelling in the slightest. Didn't CLANGING chords and overcranked dolly shots go out with the 'Scream' movies? It's beyond acceptable anymore, and don't get me started on the final shot, which negates the entire ending and is completely telegraphed. Goodnight, Fred.

Once Again Platnum Dunes have Raped another Classic Film in the name of the almighty dollar. All i can say is that they should be apologizing to the fans for this unbelievable piece of crap.Freddy looked Retarded and even worse his voice was so annoying i wanted to yell shut the hell up at the screen every time he started to talk..This movie couldn't figure out what it wanted to be in places it completely Copies scenes from the original and at other times it goes off somewhere else entirely. Compared to the Original Cast i didn't give a damn if everyone died or not because none of these Wb types were anywhere near sympathetic or even halfway developed right.The Cgi gore effects in places were downright shoddy and the ending was completely predictable well the whole movie was really.The only people that could enjoy this film are todays generation of film goers who don't really have anything to call their own since this generation will be known as the generation of hacks and copycats. People that Truly loved the original first and Second Film will hate this. As for which Kreuger is Superior well hands down Robert England. I noticed someone saying how this movie is better then the rest of Platnum dunes films which isn't saying much because Crap is crap and the bottom of the barrel is the bottom of the barrel. Horror is in Serious Need of Creativity and Originality . ITs a Shame Movies like this can be put in theaters and Good Quality horror films those that have lots of Creativity and originality Such as Trick R Treat and Frontiers and Martyrs to name a few get shoved directly to Video

With remakes being inevitable, I'd prefer that they be based on flawed originals. The new Clash of the Titans, in concept tried to do this. This is my stance on remakes. The trouble is that Hollywood green lights remakes of popular, good, movies because of their justifiable built-in fan bases. The 1984 A Nightmare on Elm Street was a refreshing, novel, approach to the slasher subgenre film. I can understand why Platinum Dunes would have was well-known music video director Samuel Bayer helm its remake. A Nightmare on Elm Street focuses on a group of teens that share haunting nightmares. When they go to sleep, they have demented dreams of a maniacal burn victim named Freddy Krueger (Jackie Earle Haley). Freddy chases the kids through his world and if he can get his knife-tipped glove on them, they die in the real world. The remaining teenagers are then tasked with insomnia as they search for the reason why Freddy wants them dead. I'll start with the positives. From an acting and casting standpoint Jackie Earle Haley is the guy you want in this role. He has a haunting voice that he modulates with perfection, coming up with his own unique take on the notorious Mr. Krueger. When combining his talents with the usual high production values (for horror films) provided by Platinum Dunes, you get a workable formula. Unlike the other films, but like Platinum Dune's other remakes, there is an attempt at a Freddy Krueger origin story. It just so happens I like the way this part of the movie is told and having the cursed teens see it in their dreams is interesting. With these elements working in the film's favor, there are many conflicts elsewhere. Notable among these are redundant dream sequences. The settings sometimes change but they almost all play the same way: teenagers walk through eerie environments followed by a Freddy attack. For a screenwriter to be so lacking in imagination is mind-boggling. Freddy's costume is easily recognizable, but the new burn victim look of his face is unappealing. Chances are a real life Freddy would look more like this than he did in the '80s, but The English Patient is not a frightening countenance. What mars the first half of the film is an insistence on not developing characters. We assume these are high school kids, who mysteriously are devoid of personalities, and then they die. I understand the concept of an ensemble cast, but when main players take such a backseat that when they finally move to the front of the minivan we don't know them. Despite a rocky start things do turn around, but our unfortunately thickheaded protagonists are slow to put things together. They should be going on about a week of sleep deprivation, but the new Nancy (Rooney Mara) seems only mildly annoyed. When Heather Langenkamp played Nancy, she was just as active but with more lines we had a better understanding of her frustration. The biggest problem of all is that the 2010 A Nightmare on Elm Street is not scary. Scare tactics all center on sound effects and it gets old fast. Every time Freddy appears there is a scream of some kind that pierces the ears of the audience. No one is jumping at fright; maybe some will jump at the surprise. This is silly, outdated, and uncreative. After Remake on Elm Street, Platinum Dunes is seemingly out of horror franchise fodder. Almost all of their remakes have been critically lambasted, but most of them managed to be profitable. I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that they plan to shell out as many sequels as the original franchises generated, but I'd prefer that action since it would keep them busy and off of more esteemed films.

When it was announced that Jackie Earle Haley would be taking on the role of Freddy in the new Elm Street franchise reboot, a collective sigh of relief went up from the fans of the originals. Haley's Rorshach was one of the few redeeming qualities in the abysmal "Watchmen" movie. When pictures of Freddy's new face were leaked, the excitement grew. This Freddy promised to drop the silly one liners and be a return to the frightening, sadistic killer from the first film. Haley does what he can with what he's given, but even a game performance from him and Rooney Mara(Nancy) can't save this film from mediocrity. The male lead is played by Kyle Gallner. He could generously be called a poor man's Robert Pattinson. He does a serviceable job here but the weak writing and directing don't do him any favours. Fans of the original will be disappointed by the brief treatment of Freddy's origins, and it's unlikely new viewers will understand what is going on or even care for that matter. My hopes of a scarier Freddy were dashed within the first few minutes. The film doesn't even try to build an atmosphere and Haley spouts the same tired one liners that the later films leaned on so heavily. Even as the original series aged, one could always rely on the excellent special effects and make-up work to carry the films. The highlight of each film was the creativity of the different "Dream Worlds" that Freddy would take his victims to. Each dream world was unique because it reflected the thoughts of the character Freddy was trying to kill. This new iteration strips away any of that creativity and takes place almost entirely in one location (I'll avoid spoilers, but if you've seen any other film in the series you can easily guess where). The makeup work that looked promising in production stills doesn't hold up well on screen, failing to be as frightening or iconic as the original. The effects aren't great, it would be easy to beat the dead horse of 'computer graphics' being inferior but I think the real problem here is directorial. Samuel Bayer simply can't hold a candle to Wes Craven. If you want to disregard my comparisons to the original films and simply take this one for what it is, a brainless slasher flick, it still fails. None of the 'kills' show any creativity at all and audiences already fed on a steady diet of graphic violence won't find anything all that shocking or disturbing here. It's just boring. Adding to that is an over reliance on cheap scares. This film is this the cinematic equivalent of someone shouting "boo!" in your face every ten minutes. This technique becomes annoying almost instantly and becomes increasingly more annoying because it is used in every single scene. It's like the director realized he didn't know how to direct a scary movie and instead of quitting and finding a new job, he decided to edit in sudden loud noises and hope no one would notice. By the end the audience I saw it with could hardly hold back their titters of laughter and I don't mean that in a good way. This is one franchise that had some potential for rebirth, but I will be amazed if this one makes it to part 2.