At least the hallmarks seem to be there. I'm not the biggest Freddy or Nightmare fan on the planet, and there's really no point in bemoaning remakes anymore, so...meh. I'll probably see it.I will say that I got word from an extremely reliable source that if what's in the script actually ends up on the screen, this incarnation of Freddy's antics will be dark dark dark- darker than what we're used to from production company Platinum Dunes and certainly moreso than Mr. Krueger's late-career Henny Youngman-style performances. So, that's something. Or not.
Oooh, "source". I feel like such a journalist! Whatta scoop!
And you, gentle reader? Are you looking forward to the new Nightmare on Elm Street, or are you raising your middle finger blade at it?
"Don't forget about meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee........."
18 comments:
Well I like the first Nightmare a lot, so I'm glad they went dark. Too dark might be worse. It was enough to know he was a child murderer without seeing it. Dream Warriors wasn't that bad either, but I don't want to see how he became "the bastard son of a thousand maniacs."
I think this has potential to be pretty good with Jackie Earl Haley in the role but after the atrocity that was the Friday the 13th remake I am not holding my breath.
Actually I'm kind of excited, I can truly say that NES (*snerk*) was the first horror movie I saw that actually got me INTO horror movies.
Although the dissapointment of the latest remakes for Halloween and F13 should throw me off, they haven't and I toats plan on seeing it.
-Jess
I always get a little bummed out when a remake comes along and puts the kibosh on the original series (bad as they may be), but I'm definitely looking forward to this movie for nothing else than Rorschach as Freddy. Should be fun if not good.
I'm torn. One, it's pointless. Two, I suppose well executed homages (and well executed has been a foreign concept with the latest wave of remakes) can get a little credit.
I guess I'll go see it. Preferrably with someone I can lambaste the hell out of it with.
I got word from an extremely reliable source that if what's in the script actually ends up on the screen
Good news if what's in the script isn't shit!
Remakes generally suck, but Jackie Earle Haley. Look at the booones, man!
I DENY ITS VERY EXISTENCE. >:(
Like you said, there is no point to bemoaning remakes anymore but when this was first announced I got much more upset than I usually do, since Nightmare is such a watershed slasher film and it's am important film to me personally.
However, with Samuel Bayer directing (I think he could be the next David Fincher or Darren Aronofsky) and Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy this has much more potential than your average remake. And we'll always have the original film.
I'm torn because Robert Englund did such a good job with Freddy. It reminds me of when Karloff stopped doing Frankenstein and they replaced him with a stuntman in Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein. It sucked.
Haley is THE reason to see Watchmen. He is the reason I will see this. I do not expect it to be good, but I acknowledge that all the elements for it to be good are there. In fact, it's one of the few remakes I support because I see a chance to greatly improve on the original if they actually care to do so.
Uh, it's okay with me, I guess. Had no interest in the Friday the 13th remake, but if word of mouth is good on this, I'll see it. Casting Jackie Earl Haley does seem like a step in the right direction.
I've always thought it was unlikely that Fred Krueger wasn't a child molester as well as a child killer. I just figured they didn't want to go that far back in the day.
And I'm not saying I want them to go that far this time, either, necessarily, but if you're going to take on this kind of character, it seems kind of obvious.
Boy Howdy do I hope this one's good. It's been far, far too long since we've had a good nightmare film.
Jackie should be great, but so was the dude who played Jason in the new Friday, and that flick was still kinda poopy.
I'll be holding out hope. Don't like to get all jaded and stuff.
Hard to replace Robert Englund but Jackie Earl Haley seems a pretty good fit.
I'm still on the fence with this one as NOES is still my favorite of the never ending series of slasher flicks. Of course I'll still see it though, even if it burns the eyes from my head.
I loved the original - it's probably in my all-time top 5 favorite horror movies. And I don't really love the latest round of horror remakes (Halloween, Friday the 13th). But I'm sure I'll see it anyway. And Nathan is right...if it sucks, we'll always have the original. My hope is that, good or bad, it will at least expose younger viewers who never saw the original to seek it out and see how a "real" horror movie is done.
Is Samuel Bayer directing? Because I heard it was - horror! - Michael Bay. Nothing good can come of that.
I'm looking forward to it.
The first one had a great premise, but kinda sad execution. Blaming it on the 80s only goes so far.
Keep Craven away from it and it might be interesting.
You're right about bitching about remakes - there's clearly nothing we can do about it. Soooo yeah...idk..I'll see a Freddy remake. I just hope its better than the Halloween one. I can't really see the Freddy pic...maybe its because I'm poolside and its too bright out to see that image. Overall, I'm somewhat excited about this.
I saw the original in the theater when I was 13 or so and it scared the crap out of me. Saw it again a couple of years ago and while it didn't suck, it was showing its age. Freddy was busting out some pretty corny lines even then, too.
In my opinion, there's been one remake of an old horror movie that was better than the original (Dawn of the Dead was fine, and didn't embarrass itself, but wasn't better than the original) - and that was The Hills Have Eyes. Craven is the king of awesome idea, crappy-to-mediocre execution. I have no problem with this remake, and for my money Jackie Earle Haley sounds effing AWESOME as a replacement for Englund. Bring it on.
Post a Comment