Back in July, I was playing around on Netflix and came across the original A Nightmare on Elm Street. I decided to watch it and it brought back the memory of my first scary movie. I blogged about it on here in Scary Movie Nostalgia Trip. That first experience is still the gold standard by which I judge all horror movies today. It's also why I've been so hesitant to sit through the "re-imagining" that was released into theater earlier this year.
The recent trend of horror movie remakes held no interest for me, up to this point. The original Halloween was a great movie but, I haven't liked any movie Rob Zombie has made so I had no interest in his remake. The original Friday the 13th is just a terrible movie so why would I want to see a remake of something that was already awful? Although thanks to streaming Netflix, I'm now going through the entire Friday series so I'll probably watch the new one just to be a completist. Anyway, I finally gave in to the resistance and ordered the latest Nightmare on demand.
I have to admit, at the start, the movie had a couple of strikes against it. One was the fact that Robert Englund was not part of the movie. He's the ONLY Freddy Krueger for God's sake! How do you do the movie without him? The other was the lack of involvement by Wes Craven. He created these characters and directed the original. Any horror fan can tell you what happened to the series when he left. But, I was determined to give this new one a fair shake and that's what I did. Be aware this may be a bit spoilery.
Well, I wasn't a big fan of the changes. First off, they tried to bring Freddy into the 21st century by making him the ghost of a child molester getting revenge on the kids who turned him in as opposed to just being some crazed child killer. So now he has a motive but, why give him one? He didn't need an entire backstory that, while somewhat interesting, is unnecessary. It just seemed like an attempt at giving sympathy to a character who doesn't need it. I also think it just reduces him to any other horror movie character.
Plus, another thing that made Freddy such an iconic character was that he was the first of these horror movie killers to actually speak. And he could be funny, when he did. This new Freddy is just creepy and has no humor whatsoever. Jackie Earl Haley is a great actor but the way he speaks his lines just sounds silly, not scary or funny. It doesn't help that now, knowing he's a pedophile, his "jokes" just come across as gross. And yes, I know it's a horror movie and he isn't supposed to be sweet but this is a remake of a classic. It's gonna draw comparisons.
As a whole, the cast seems to have been given valium before each scene was shot. Ironic huh, for a movie where everyone is supposed to be trying to stay awake. And the WORST offender of this is our supposed heroine, Nancy. She's played by Rooney Mara and the only thing that would be less interesting would be watching a snail trying to cross a six-lane highway. It made me long for original Nancy, Heather Langenkamp, and while she was over the top, she made we want to cheer her on.
Nancy's mom in this one is no longer an alcoholic. You won't find this one passed out holding a bottle of vodka. Also, Nancy's father is nowhere to be found. I guess this is supposed to make her the "tough, single mom" but, she just comes across as a total witch who is hiding the past from her daughter.
Which brings up the question: How is it that not ONE of these kids has a single memory of what happened back in the day? Did the parents have them all brainwashed? This new past involved an entire pre-K/Kindergarten class and not a single one has single memory of ANYTHING that happened? But, I digress.
Ok, enough of the negative stuff. There were elements of the new movie I DID like. First off, the references made to certain scenes from the original were really cool. The use of the CGI was also pretty effective for the most part. Especially, when the kids are dreaming awake and the scene is flashing around them from drug store to boiler room in the same second (hard to explain that one). The only time I found issue with the new graphics was in this movie's version of the bed scene (remember Johnny Depp?) and the final shot of Nancy's mom at the front door. I think the CGI actually takes away from these two scenes. In the first movie, they came across more "real". In this one, it was a little more obvious they used computer graphics. I guess it's just one of those times when CGI isn't always an improvement. But they were still fun to watch for nostalgic reasons.
Another thing this had going for it were the actual scares. There were a few times I did jump. That doesn't happen very often anymore. So I think, if I had seen this movie on it's own terms I would've liked it more. It's a pretty good scary movie. But seeing how this was a "re-imagining", I couldn't help but compare it to the original. I just didn't care for the story changes. And in 25 years, people are just going to lump this in with all the others from "that period when they remade all the good horror movies". Whereas the original will be still seen as one of films that helped to shape an entire genre.
Until next time...
No comments:
Post a Comment