On its surface, I suppose this should be a great idea. Advancements in visual effects would definitely expand the possibilities for creative scenarios and nightmarish landscapes that the original film is known for.
But seeing Michael Bay as the producer and the director having no experience outside of commercials and music videos leads me to the conclusion that this will be a slicked-up, oversaturated, predictable and forgettable experience. The people behind these remakes don’t seem to realize that the high production values and telegraphed suspense makes the film LESS scary, not more. That’s why the remakes of The Hitcher and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre sucked; they lacked the raw edge and unpredictability that made the absurd premises of the original films seem plausible, which successfully preyed on our fears of backhoods hicks/hitchhikers/our nightmares.
And I’m sure there’s going to be a full backstory this time to explain every little detail of Freddy Krueger’s origin and sap any mystery of his existence. Because after all, knowing more about the monster makes him scarier.
God, I hope Jackie Earle Haley got a shitload of money for this.
Evan
I second everything Robert just said. However, I’ll still see this just for Haley.
I have an absolute aversion against all those recent “horror” movies and senseless remakes just for the sakes of it. I understand they’re profitable movies, but for the rest they add absolutely nothing to the culture of mankind.
RJNeb2
Ah, how the heart sinks when the words “From producer Michael Bay” appears onscreen.
Won’t be screened for critics, killer opening weekend, massive drop-off the following weekend.
Did I leave anything out?
marco70go
Here we go again.. Why remake a movie that, despite its limited budget, did become a cult classic?
Robert Englund’s Freddy Krueger is by now an iconic mask, anyone else in the role – Haley included – will pale in comparison.
Despite a decent third outing, the Elm Street franchise already did threaten to destroy the power of the original movie, before Wes Craven reinvented and saved it with his New Nightmare; and after that, Freddy vs. Jason managed again to reduce Freddy Krueger and Jason Voorhees to cartoonish level.
I really don’t think we needed a refurbished, Michael Bay-blessed version of Elm Street.
al b.
BAY – ew!
Bayer – ew!
Haley – EPIIIIIIIIC!
efwe
That sucked all the humor from Freddy. Get ready for another terrible remake.
Vito
I gotta say, I like the visual look. However, that means nothing until I see the flick. I’m sure it’ll pretty much suck, even though Haley as Freddy is great casting.
Also, they filmed at my old high school, and I watched. It was pretty cool.
Sean
Since the teaser is posted here, am I to believe this will be In Contention for next year’s races?
AmericanRequiem
suprised you guys put this up, come up debbie downers, this doesnt actually look half bad, be optimistic for once
“A Nightmare on Elm Street” is just one of those cult classic horror films that shouldn’t be remade. Part of the charm of the 1984 version is the 80’s Donnie Darko look and feel, the Cronenberg-esque effects, Johnny Depp, etc, etc.
It just can’t and won’t be duplicated — certainly not by Platinum Dunes.
Chris138
Jackie Earle Haley being in this gives it some hope.
JFK
I too am of the camp of folk against the flood of recent horror re-makes, but this one might have a chance. Hayley is an excellent actor and fitting for the part. I am curious about the back story, the trailer suggests that Krueger did not do what he was accused of–that would be a fresh approach.
I am a little uncertain about Krueger’s face though, it doesn’t appear burned, just dusty.
twinzin
Wow they used some of the best kills from the entire series and bundle them all into one flick. It looks good technically but I don’t know
Oh no, I’m burning alive! Guess I don’t need this jacket.
greg
efwe- In the Original NOES, Freddy was not pun loving killer that he became in later entries. Freddy was a dark twisted character, and actually had very few lines. While the original film straddles the line of black comedy and horror, FK is not funny- the jokes he makes are intentionally bad to create more discomfort and terror for his victims, and to make them feel less significant and hopeless, like the lost children he killed.
this trailer, even though it is coated with the Micheal bay sheen and has that ridiculous jacket removal (like he is clark kent lol), has me excited. You have JEH as Freddy, and in a very crucial role as Mrs.Thompson, Connie Briton of FNLs fame… the trailer created a good amount dread and the design of freddy’s face has me intrigued.
I was just going to say what Greg said. The original NOEL isn’t a comedy. The second one turned it into a weird gay kabuki circus and the third one then went back to horror, but with a few one-liners thrown in (“welcome to prime time, bitch” etc) and after that it descended into comedy first, scares second. Until “Wes Craven’s New Nightmare”, however.
I’ll also defend the “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” “remake” (it’s a sequel more than anything) since, as Hollywoodised horror movies (and especially these remakes) go that one is far from predictable or safe or watered down. If anything the remake is far more deranged and freakin’ insane than the original (the original, which is one of the greatest films ever made. something i made clear during those “most influential movie” polls earlier in the year). Strange to say this is a positive, but it really got the helplessness and utter dispair right, the sort of feeling a movie like that SHOULD have. Compare it to “The Hitcher”, “Friday the 13th”, “The Omen”, “Halloween” and all the other remakes we’ve seen and the differences are clear.
greg
glenn- ditto on the second NOES: It’s amazing that the film was actually made in 1985, considering the AIDS scare was just picking up.
Comments
22 responses to “Revamping ‘Elm Street’”
On its surface, I suppose this should be a great idea. Advancements in visual effects would definitely expand the possibilities for creative scenarios and nightmarish landscapes that the original film is known for.
But seeing Michael Bay as the producer and the director having no experience outside of commercials and music videos leads me to the conclusion that this will be a slicked-up, oversaturated, predictable and forgettable experience. The people behind these remakes don’t seem to realize that the high production values and telegraphed suspense makes the film LESS scary, not more. That’s why the remakes of The Hitcher and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre sucked; they lacked the raw edge and unpredictability that made the absurd premises of the original films seem plausible, which successfully preyed on our fears of backhoods hicks/hitchhikers/our nightmares.
And I’m sure there’s going to be a full backstory this time to explain every little detail of Freddy Krueger’s origin and sap any mystery of his existence. Because after all, knowing more about the monster makes him scarier.
God, I hope Jackie Earle Haley got a shitload of money for this.
I second everything Robert just said. However, I’ll still see this just for Haley.
I have an absolute aversion against all those recent “horror” movies and senseless remakes just for the sakes of it. I understand they’re profitable movies, but for the rest they add absolutely nothing to the culture of mankind.
Ah, how the heart sinks when the words “From producer Michael Bay” appears onscreen.
Won’t be screened for critics, killer opening weekend, massive drop-off the following weekend.
Did I leave anything out?
Here we go again.. Why remake a movie that, despite its limited budget, did become a cult classic?
Robert Englund’s Freddy Krueger is by now an iconic mask, anyone else in the role – Haley included – will pale in comparison.
Despite a decent third outing, the Elm Street franchise already did threaten to destroy the power of the original movie, before Wes Craven reinvented and saved it with his New Nightmare; and after that, Freddy vs. Jason managed again to reduce Freddy Krueger and Jason Voorhees to cartoonish level.
I really don’t think we needed a refurbished, Michael Bay-blessed version of Elm Street.
BAY – ew!
Bayer – ew!
Haley – EPIIIIIIIIC!
That sucked all the humor from Freddy. Get ready for another terrible remake.
I gotta say, I like the visual look. However, that means nothing until I see the flick. I’m sure it’ll pretty much suck, even though Haley as Freddy is great casting.
Also, they filmed at my old high school, and I watched. It was pretty cool.
Since the teaser is posted here, am I to believe this will be In Contention for next year’s races?
suprised you guys put this up, come up debbie downers, this doesnt actually look half bad, be optimistic for once
Sean: Perhaps you’ve been out to lunch the last year and a half but we don’t cover ONLY awards-related topics at this site anymore.
I’ve noticed.
“A Nightmare on Elm Street” is just one of those cult classic horror films that shouldn’t be remade. Part of the charm of the 1984 version is the 80’s Donnie Darko look and feel, the Cronenberg-esque effects, Johnny Depp, etc, etc.
It just can’t and won’t be duplicated — certainly not by Platinum Dunes.
Jackie Earle Haley being in this gives it some hope.
I too am of the camp of folk against the flood of recent horror re-makes, but this one might have a chance. Hayley is an excellent actor and fitting for the part. I am curious about the back story, the trailer suggests that Krueger did not do what he was accused of–that would be a fresh approach.
I am a little uncertain about Krueger’s face though, it doesn’t appear burned, just dusty.
Wow they used some of the best kills from the entire series and bundle them all into one flick. It looks good technically but I don’t know
It will be hard to not see Englund in the role. Haley appears so short it seems funny. Still its hard to botch a remake of this great horror material.
chuck
This was a terrible, terrible idea.
Oh no, I’m burning alive! Guess I don’t need this jacket.
efwe- In the Original NOES, Freddy was not pun loving killer that he became in later entries. Freddy was a dark twisted character, and actually had very few lines. While the original film straddles the line of black comedy and horror, FK is not funny- the jokes he makes are intentionally bad to create more discomfort and terror for his victims, and to make them feel less significant and hopeless, like the lost children he killed.
this trailer, even though it is coated with the Micheal bay sheen and has that ridiculous jacket removal (like he is clark kent lol), has me excited. You have JEH as Freddy, and in a very crucial role as Mrs.Thompson, Connie Briton of FNLs fame… the trailer created a good amount dread and the design of freddy’s face has me intrigued.
I was just going to say what Greg said. The original NOEL isn’t a comedy. The second one turned it into a weird gay kabuki circus and the third one then went back to horror, but with a few one-liners thrown in (“welcome to prime time, bitch” etc) and after that it descended into comedy first, scares second. Until “Wes Craven’s New Nightmare”, however.
I’ll also defend the “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” “remake” (it’s a sequel more than anything) since, as Hollywoodised horror movies (and especially these remakes) go that one is far from predictable or safe or watered down. If anything the remake is far more deranged and freakin’ insane than the original (the original, which is one of the greatest films ever made. something i made clear during those “most influential movie” polls earlier in the year). Strange to say this is a positive, but it really got the helplessness and utter dispair right, the sort of feeling a movie like that SHOULD have. Compare it to “The Hitcher”, “Friday the 13th”, “The Omen”, “Halloween” and all the other remakes we’ve seen and the differences are clear.
glenn- ditto on the second NOES: It’s amazing that the film was actually made in 1985, considering the AIDS scare was just picking up.