Three, four, better lock your door...
Five, six, grab your crucifix...
Seven, eight, better stay up late...
Nine, ten...never sleep again...
The iconic chant of the creepy little children that somehow always follow Freddy Krueger around. It's just one part of the iconic Nightmare on Elm Street series that has become so beloved by so many. And why? Well, it's most obviously because of the ever-charming personality of the antagonist of the series, Freddy Krueger - for eight films and a television series played by Robert Englund - the bastard son of a hundred maniacs, conceived in a madhouse and eventually growing up to be a child murderer who was burned alive by a bunch of vengeful parents, but came back as a demon to haunt the nightmares of their...teenagers.
...never go for the kill when you can go for the pain, I guess.
But yes, people came to love Freddy in spite of the fact he was a remorseless serial killer. It's kind of like the same reason if Satan ever comes to conquer humanity, he'll win just by virtue of being pretty and witty. Nevertheless, by the time of Freddy vs. Jason, it became clear that there were really no more directions for the franchise to go. Enter Michael Bay and Platinum Dunes, who come up with the brilliant idea of resurrecting it through the almighty Reboot.
Given the nature of the man heading up the project and the fact that Robert Englund was - for the first time ever - not going to be Freddy Krueger, it was understandable that certain people were going to be at best a little hesitant about trusting that this remake would be all sunshine and rainbows. And most of the time, they would be entirely right. But this remake did have some things going for it right off the bat, namely that Robert Englund approved of the casting of Jackie Earl Haley as his successor in the role of Freddy, and he is really the only thing that people don't complain about with this film.
But is it all that bad? Does the stench of Michael Bay just cover this film so much? Or is it because the original is just so beloved that people are offended that Hollywood would even think of a remake. And that's part of the reason I'm here. The Reel Thoughts of Horror Month 2015 are going to cover the remakes of three specific franchises.
That's right, three. And for the last two films, you damn well better appreciate it, because that movie and its sequel are absolutely brutal on the senses.
But for now, we look into another of the bigger slasher film franchises being done up for the big screen for the first time in seven years. And right off the bat, I can take out the main issue that people seem to have with this film - namely that they remember the sequels to the original A Nightmare on Elm Street, but not the original itself. People remember the jokes, they remember the quips, and Robert Englund did them well...even if they started to get very, very grating after the third movie.
But in the first two movies? Freddy was hardly the snarky joke machine that he became famous for being. Sure, he made an occasional joke or quip if the situation warranted, but he rarely even spoke much less spouted one-liners. He was, y'know...quiet...menacing...
Rather like he is in this movie. How 'bout that?!
Even looking into the second movie (y'know, that one that nobody likes for reasons I will never understand), the guy was frightening as all get out and arguably even more so than the first movie seeing as he spent the entire run time of the film - driving a person insane as he possessed him! But no, nobody likes to remember that Freddy, they like to remember the wise-cracking jackass who kills people off with the snappy one-liners and puns.
They don't want to acknowledge that their beloved Freddy Krueger is, in fact a deranged psychopath who kills - largely children, no less - without any hint of remorse. And I am giving Robert Englund his due credit here, the man is a masterstroke and deserves a lot, lot better than to be stuck for the rest of his life tied to the persona of an insane burn victim in a terrible Christmas sweater. The fact is that the character of Freddy Krueger is not relatable, not likeable, and so not be treated as either of those things. He's evil.
So yeah, you can imagine I really don't get the fanboy rage that gets built up over the "accurate" portrayal of Freddy versus how he's done in this movie, when this is the most like Freddy he's been since the original and arguably New Nightmare. And before someone says that I'm just bashing Freddy, I put the same complaints to those who try to insist Michael Myers, Jason Voorhees, Leatherface, or even Pinhead and others are relatable.
You're idiots. Every last one of you.
Getting to the plot, however, we pick up with Nancy Holbrook (Rooney Mara) picking up the investigation into a mysterious man with a creepy claw, fedora, and a red and green sweater after the death of her best friend Kris (Katie Cassidy) and...
...oh, you're wondering why I basically skipped over the first half hour or so of the film and spoiled one of the first major deaths? Because they did the same thing in the original and nobody should really be all that surprised. Though due credit to Katie Cassidy, she's at least somewhat likeable as a decoy protagonist and actually does manage to last longer than her counterpart in the original.
Nevertheless, Nancy and her not-Johnny Depp boyfriend Quentin (Kyle Gallner) begin to dig into things as Freddy begins to pile up the bodies. Eventually, the truth comes out - all the murder victims attended the same preschool together, where Freddy was a gardener and sexual abused the children...or, at least, that's what the parents say. There's actually some question as to whether or not the parents' allegations are true, but like the death of Freddy in the original films, they burned him to death just the same.
This time instead, however, it seems that Freddy wants revenge on the kids for lying, not the parents for burning him to death. Honestly, I thought this was a very interesting twist on the entire concept. A new angle to approach it from that, perhaps, Freddy could actually be a sympathetic character. Of course, he isn't and I knew he ultimately wasn't going to be, but the fact that the production team even thought of putting that in shows some actual thought, which is pretty damn rare for a remake all things considered. They could have just done a paint by the numbers full on Nightmare film and they chose to actually try something a little different. Kudos.
There's also people who take issue with Freddy being changed in this version from a child murderer into a child molester. I don't. The fact is this - Freddy Krueger is a deranged, murderous, psychopath. He was that was in the originals, he's that way here, and it's amazing that people seem to think that a man who was burned to death and kills people in their dreams for the hell of it has anything remotely resembling standards. I know why, of course. It's because - as I said before - people have fallen in love with the representations of Freddy in the sequels where he's all witty an charming, rather than the original. The joker and pun-maker who kills rather than the former child killer who kills.
I'd say it's like the mindless devotion that Batman gets, but at least that can have an argument made for it: Batman's ultimately (for the most part) heroic...if he's not being written by Frank Miller. People who are screaming "Betrayal!" at the portrayal of Freddy in this movie, saying it's nothing like the original, are trying to defend the "good name" of a deranged psychopath.
Let that sink in for a minute.
It actually brings to mind A New Nightmare (probably the best entry in the series outside of the original), where Wes Craven's entire argument in the film was that Freddy had become too saturated and dummied out by the passage of time and the sequels. He'd gotten away from being scary. But then I seem to be one of the select few who saw the film, got the point, and actually appreciated it rather than just clamoring to see Freddy vs. Jason (which I think is the only film that pissed off fans of Freddy more than this one), so what the hell do I know?
Oh, and by the way, Wes Craven's original idea was to have Freddy be a child molester, but New Line said no at the time. So much for your complaint about it not being in the original depiction.
The film, from the beginning of Nancy picking up the investigation, pretty much follows the same formula as the original Nightmare. complete with the twist ending that Freddy's not really dead because of course every horror film has to have a twist ending.
Also, for the record on that last kill, daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayum Freddy!
Where I will give the film grief in the use of CGI where it isn't needed. Faithful recreations of scenes from the original - such as the Freddy stretching out the wall scene - are nice, but ultimately could have been done with practical effects and were done far, far better in the original. Same goes for some of the dream landscapes. In the original, Wes Craven deliberately set up everything besides the boiler room itself - the sanctum of Freddy's power - to make the viewer confused as to whether what they were watching was real or in a dream.
Here, almost all the shifts are so abrupt and blatantly obvious, such as when Kris is confronted with Freddy and he gets his first spoken dialogue. Yes, Fallout-chic looks frightening but unless Freddy's going to be killing people with conjured Deathclaws, it's really rather pointless for a scene that lasts less than three minutes. I don't mind it, but it's really just unnecessary.
The acting is also a little mixed. Perhaps it's just my personal view, but I did not find Rooney Mara to be a good replacement for Heather Langenkamp as Nancy. Perhaps it's because she doesn't have the intrinsic likability of her sister Kate, or perhaps it's because she plays the role as being rather detached and barely awake (Ha!). Then again, they were going with the bizarre arty goth girl angle that would have made this film a hit in 2003, so what do I know?
The rest of the cast fares no better, either being marginalized or likewise fighting off sleep while on camera. Especially Clancy Brown being in the film as one of the parents. I don't know about you, but I wanted to see the Kurgan fight Freddy Krueger, damn it! Awesome movie idea is awesome!
But really, I find that the hate for this film is unnecessary - whether it's because you hate Michael Bay (who, from what I've read, had little to do with either this or the Friday remake besides greenlighting it and throwing in some money for it) or you hate that your precious image of a deranged, psychopath maniac was ruined forever - and I'd suggest trying to come back to it with an open mind. It certainly has its flaws, but it was a good effort, if a little overdone and underdone in some aspects.
And you could do a lot worse as far as remakes go...and we'll be getting into that in a few weeks...
A Nightmare on Elm Street is now available from New Line Cinemas and Platinum Dunes.
For the latest from the MadCapMunchkin, be sure to follow him on Twitter @MadCapMunchkin.
No comments:
Post a Comment