At last! My Elm Street Marathon begins, kicking off with the recently released remake/reboot. Following this installment, I’ll be going back to its roots with the original Elm Street film of 1984, and then moving forward in the series from there, ending with Freddy vs. Jason, and afterwards, I’ll give a review of the even more recently released Never Sleep Again, a documentary on the Elm Street franchise as a whole. In the words of Shang Tsung, “It HAS begunn!!!”
WARNING: This review contains plot spoilers for those that have not watched the film. I have a segment on the plot sectioned off from the rest of the review, but skipping over it won’t completely keep you free from spoilers
==========================================================
I. OVERVIEW:
I finally got a chance to catch the A Nightmare on Elm Street reboot earlier this afternoon [EDIT: The time of this writing was Thursday May 20. I only finished it tonight] . As a huge fan of the Nightmare franchise, I’ll try to review this movie from both an objective perspective and one that takes into account this film’s genetic history, the Nightmare films that have come before it. Also, just to let you know, this review, because it is the first article about an Elm Street movie, will also inevitably be about how I always dreamed and wanted to do the Nightmare films as a franchise and not about just the reboot itself.
I have to say that, leaving the theater, I was feeling that the movie was more than a little decent. I was content with what the people behind this movie had done. I, of course, had gripes and disappointments in some of the directions taken, but overall I was happy that my favorite horror franchise wasn’t raped like Halloween was with Rob Zombie’s reboot, and arguably the Friday the 13th franchise (I personally liked the remake, but apparently die-hard Friday fans weren’t pleased. Also, I’ve avoided all reviews and impressions of the new Elm Street movie since its release, both from critics and fans, so I’m currently unaware of how my fellow Fred-heads feel about the movie. This was all in an effort to give my totally unbiased and personal opinion). Especially considering that this reboot was made by Michael Bay’s production company Platinum Dunes, the company behind the recent reboots of both The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Friday the 13th franchises, along with a number of other one-shot horror films that have been hit-or-miss by horror fans. I feel that this movie was good enough to serve as a gateway to the franchise for new fans, or people too young to have experienced the past movies, of which I can’t say about for the Halloween reboot (EVERYONE needs to experience the original; it’s a cinematic horror masterpiece). If you’ve never seen the original A Nightmare on Elm Street and saw this beforehand, I think you could watch and enjoy both films.
==========================================================
II. PLOT SUMMARY (Taken from Wikipedia)
While at the Springwood Diner with his girlfriend, Kris Fowles (Katie Cassidy), Dean Russell (Kellan Lutz) falls asleep at the table and meets a man covered in burn scars, wearing a red and green sweater and a clawed glove on his hand. The burned man cuts Dean's throat in the dream, but in reality it appears that Dean is cutting his own throat as friend and waitress Nancy Holbrook (Rooney Mara) looks on with Kris. At Dean's funeral, Kris sees a photograph of her and Dean as children, but cannot recall ever knowing Dean before high school. Kris begins to dream about the burned man herself and refuses to go to sleep for fear that she will die in her dreams. Jesse Braun (Thomas Dekker), Kris's ex-boyfriend, shows up at her house to keep her company while she sleeps, but Kris meets the burned man in her dreams and is murdered. Covered in blood, Jesse runs to Nancy's house to try to explain what happened and he learns that Nancy has been having dreams about the same man; that man's name is Freddy (Jackie Earle Haley).
Jesse is apprehended by the police under suspicion of murdering Kris, and is killed by Freddy when he falls asleep in his jail cell. With her friends dying, Nancy begins to question what everyone's connection is to each other, given that none of them can remember each other before their teenage years. Eventually, Nancy and her friend Quentin Smith (Kyle Gallner) discover that all of them, including more children, attended the same preschool together. Nancy's mother Gwen (Connie Britton) reluctantly tells Nancy and Quentin that there was a gardener at the preschool, Fred Krueger, who hurt Nancy and the rest of the kids. Gwen explains that Nancy was his favorite, and came home one day telling her mom about Freddy's "magic cave" and the things that happened down there. Gwen claims Krueger skipped town before he was arrested. Nancy does not believe her and attempts to track down the remaining kids from the school. Nancy eventually discovers that all of the other kids have been killed, most of them in their sleep. Meanwhile, Quentin tries to accept that everything is nothing more than repressed memories, but he falls asleep during swim practice and witnesses what really happened to Krueger. Quentin sees everyone's parents hunt down Krueger, and then burn him alive. Quentin and Nancy confront Quentin's father, Alan Smith (Clancy Brown), about the reality they murdered Krueger with no actual evidence that he had committed any crime. Nancy and Quentin, who both begin sporadically dreaming while they are awake as a result of insomnia, decide to go to the preschool and learn what they can about Krueger.
On the way, Nancy falls asleep and is attacked by Freddy, but when Quentin wakes her up they discover she has pulled a piece of Freddy's sweater out of the dreamworld and into reality. Quentin takes Nancy to the hospital for cuts on her arm; there, he steals some adrenaline and a syringe to help them stay awake. Nancy and Quentin leave the hospital and eventually make it to the preschool. Quentin uncovers Krueger's "magic cave" and the evidence that proves Krueger was physically and sexually abusing all of the children. Nancy decides the only way to end this is to pull Krueger out of their dreams and kill him in reality. Quentin tries to stay awake long enough to pull Nancy out of her dream when she has Freddy, but he falls asleep and is attacked. Krueger then goes after Nancy, and explains that he intentionally left her for last so she would stay awake long enough that when she finally fell asleep, she would no longer be able to wake back up. While Nancy struggles with Freddy, Quentin wakes and uses the adrenaline to wake up Nancy who pulls Freddy into reality. With Krueger distracted by Quentin, Nancy uses a broken paper cutter blade to cut Freddy's gloved hand off, and then slice his throat. Afterward, Nancy torches the secret room, with Krueger's body left inside, while she and Quentin leave. Nancy and her mother return home from the hospital, with Nancy being told she should get some sleep. Krueger suddenly appears in a mirror's reflection and kills Nancy's mother before pulling her body through the mirror while Nancy screams.
==========================================================
III. THE REVIEW
1. Directing I: Atmosphere, Tone, and Pacing
Prior to release, Platinum Dunes and Bryan Fuller, the producer, made it a point to the fans that they were going to take the franchise back to it's darker and more sinister roots, similar to the tone of the original film (as the franchise grew in numbered films, the Nightmare films had became more and more campy and comedic rather than truly terrifying). With that in mind, Platinum Dunes was largely successful. The film takes itself seriously and keeps true to its word. At the same time, I know there are fans that like the more comedic films compared to the darker ones, and I felt this reboot is able to satisfy them to an extent as well as there are a number moments where Freddy makes a some great quips. The film doesn’t have quite the more patient, foreboding and disturbing tone as I would have liked however. In the original, Fred Krueger was revealed to the audience very meticulously and carefully, and you could hardly see the dream demon in most of his scenes, making him a real boogeyman of the night. In the remake Freddy is very visible almost right out of the gate and there were a couple of moments in the movie where I felt Freddy was too seen too much, notably during his confrontations with Jesse and Nancy. Though that isn’t to say that there aren’t moments of mystery surrounding Fred Krueger as the dream demon (the way he looks during the scenes in the preschool during Kris’ dreams are fantastic, reminiscent of the way he looked as when Tina first encountered Freddy in her dreams on the blue-lit street of the original) but I would have liked him to be presented in a more enigmatic and unfathomable manner. But nonetheless it does a good job of never letting the audience get too complacent. The filmmakers are aware of how much this film is loved by horror enthusiasts, and this film demonstrates that.
Before directing this film, Samuel Bayer directed music videos, many of which are pretty iconic and popular. He’s directed the music videos for Nirvana, Green Day, The Smashing Pumpkins, and My Chemical Romance. From his music videos you can see he’s got a pretty great visual mind and he brings his talent for imagery to this movie. The way he lights his settings and composes the frame are evocative and seductive in a twisted and dark fashion. One that immediately comes to mind is Kris’ dream sequence in the preschool, and when Kris steps into her backyard at night. It’s a shame that his style gets hampered by the use of CG kills and less-then-stellar acting.
As for the pacing, I thought the film’s length was just fine. I did, however, feel a strange hiccup when Nancy and Quentin set off to find the Badham Preschool. At that moment I thought the film was ramping up into the final conflict, the climax, and I was surprised when the film followed them to the convenience store and hospital. I just thought the was going to end soon when they set off for the school. Not that big of a deal.
2. Story and Plot Details, and comparison to the original
I thought that plot-wise the reboot was solid enough. Micro-napping doesn’t really make sense, but whatever, it lets the movie do things it wouldn’t normally have been able to do (Dreaming is widely considered to occur during the REM stage of sleep, so simply nodding off for a second wouldn’t force you into Freddy‘s world. Also, those that are sleep-deprived would have an easier time dreaming so actually getting some sleep might have been better for the characters). I do wish the remake took a little care into the circumstances under which the characters were falling asleep though. It’s pretty hard to believe that someone can fall asleep in the middle of swimming in a pool like Quentin does. The reboot also had a little more screen time and characterization for Kris and Jesse compared to their 1984 counterparts, which I appreciated, and the fact that Quentin didn’t die was surprising to me, considering his counterpart in the original film, the then-unknown Johnny Depp, died (and in a most spectacular, fantastical manner). I did like Krueger’s different history as a gardener at a preschool. It made him more sinister because he was in a close and trusted position with the kids, while in the original Fred Krueger worked as a janitor in a power plant, and he would drive around in an ice cream truck to lure children and then bring them back to the boiler room of the power plant. It was a nice twist and deviation from the original that helped the reboot forge its own identity from the originals. This didn’t work in a way though because the symbolic boiler room didn’t exactly have the same meaning as it did in the previous films. In the previous films, Krueger manifested the boiler room when terrorizing his kids because, not only was it scary as hell, but he was literally bringing them into the place that he not only killed children but the place where the parents kill him, so there was some kind of poetic justice going on there. In the reboot, the human Krueger didn’t have a boiler room, it was a basement. Was the boiler room in the dreams then an exaggerated and monstrous version of his former bas of operations? I guess. Still not as cool. And it makes Krueger’s escape to the boiler room in the first place kind of random, considering he didn’t work there or kill children there like his 1984 counterpart. I liked that there was no mention of a family he had (a retcon made in the terrible sequel Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare), and that his life as a gardener that lived in the preschool’s basement has little room for a retcon in the future.
One thing I was unhappy with was the movie’s mystery regarding whether Fred Krueger was innocent or guilty of committing evil acts towards the children. Well, not so much the mystery of it, but the fact that Krueger did end up being guilty. If Fred Krueger in this reboot franchise was innocent, I think it would have given this reboot’s franchise more of an identity of its own, and a welcome, different take on the franchise. It would have been a bold thing to do on the part of the filmmakers. At the least, it would have been interesting. However, Krueger ending up guilty does two things: One, it keeps it more in line with the original franchise, which may make some die-hard fans happy, but at that point you have to ask yourself, “If you’re going to keep the plot so similar to the original, then is the application of modern special effects enough to warrant a remake for you?” Second, it ends up wasting time in the movie if you spend time having the audience wonder whether or not Freddy really do it, building mystery and intrigue, only to have it say “Yeah, he did it. Let’s move on.” There’s no pay-off to just having him finally being guilty. The only function I can see making that decision did was to move the characters towards the basement of the preschool, because we know Krueger wanted the kids to find the pictures of Nancy. Thus, it only served as a plot device to drive Nancy and Jesse to Krueger’s home. In my opinion it would have been better to be brave and make Krueger innocent because it adds a new dimension to the Fred Krueger concept.
Secondly, the decision to make Krueger responsible for only one preschool class seemed like the wrong thing to do for numerous reasons. Firstly, it makes Krueger seem less notorious or infamous. Of course, when you’re a child killer/molester you’re evil enough that you don’t really need notoriety but it does help in a few ways. In the original film, Krueger was known to have killed at least twenty kids (these were the murders known of). He was known as the Springwood Slasher, a killer than encompassed the whole city. This put him on a level of real-life monsters like John Wayne Gacy. This Kruger, then, seems like small fry compared to the original. Secondly, the notoriety helps make it more plausible for a mob to perform a manhunt on Krueger. In the originals Krueger actually was tried for all the murders he committed, but was let free on a technicality. This serves as a perfect and reasonable reason for parents to take justice into their own hands. I can believe in a parent’s ensuing rage that would result from such an occurrence, the dozens of parents enraged that their children’s murderer was let free. In the reboot, the lack of notoriety creates less parents and doesn’t have the high-profile trial of Krueger, which creates a less plausible rage for me from the parents. Furthermore, the reboot’s reasons for its parents don‘t seem as warranted; They don’t go to the police, and they simply didn’t want their kids to have to go through the experience of going on trial against Krueger. Weak sauce. I mean, the parents of the original actually do turn to the police and justice system, only to have it fail them and their children’s murderer goes free. That makes for a much more believable and exciting story. I will say, though, that the direction the reboot takes does do two things: the lack of notoriety surrounding Krueger and only having the parents on it helps it in the realm of believability in relation to the cover-up aspect. In the original, the vigilante murder of a high-profile serial killer by such a great number of parents surely would have prompted investigation, so having Krueger’s crimes committed to such a limited number of kids, and thus parents, makes the cover up of their murder and no one knowing of or remembering Fred Krueger more feasible. The second thing, in giving the parents such a weak sauce reason for killing Krueger, the subsequent wrath of Krueger on their children puts much more fault on the parents. Exactly BECAUSE they weren’t as completely justified in killing Krueger compared to their original film counterparts gives the film a more sins-of-the-father feature that I always wanted the original franchise to have (and this would have been even further supplemented had Freddy been innocent like I stated earlier).
The other reason I didn’t like that Krueger’s crimes were limited to just a preschool class is because it limits future characters with a personal tie or history to Krueger. At first, I thought, “Well, I guess the sequels could follow the other children from the class,” and I kind of liked how having other known kids that were victims but were not featured in this movie gave it a Final Destination feeling, that other kids would inevitably fall victim to Freddy. But then the film made it known that all the other kids had already died. Why do that? It completely kills the path the film is on and could have gone farther down on. Of course, you could always say that Krueger committed the same thing at other places and then introduce those characters, but revealing something like that in future movies just seem like bad retconning on the part of the filmmakers for the sake of making a sequel.
I disliked that Krueger’s back story was revealed by Freddy himself through a dream sequence for Quentin. It seemed like it would have been better if it was shown during Nancy’s mother’s exposition, like in the original. I mean, she’s already relaying what they did to Freddy, and it doesn’t really make sense for Freddy to share that about himself to Quentin. I mean, I guess it does in terms of the reboot because we’re told that he wants the kids to remember, but this brings up another point that I wasn’t satisfied with: Freddy was killing the teenagers because of what they did to him, and not as a punishment to the parents that killed him. As I said earlier, the parents already have more blame and fault in this version than the original, but it’s all moot because Freddy isn’t mad at them. It just takes away the sins-of-the-father feature that I gave the film earlier. Sure, even with the different motivation the consequences end up being the same: Freddy kills kids in their nightmares. But the point is that the motivation totally changes the dimension of films. If it did have it, it gives the film a level of symbolism and deeper complexity like the original as opposed to being just a slasher. Having Freddy kill kids as a punishment to the parents always gave the films a higher meaning (in the same way Halloween is seen as a social critique of the suburbs of the 70s), like, for example, that we are all products of our parents, including their sins and vices. Or that parents be careful with their kids because their mistakes and vices inescapably affects their children. But this film misses out on that relationship dynamic between the parents, Freddy, and the kids.
I didn’t like that Nancy was so special to Freddy. In fact I’ve never liked that, even in the old films. In the originals Nancy lived in the house that Freddy lived in while he was human and killing kids, and she was the first to defeat him so she was special in this way. Here, Nancy was Freddy’s favorite. I know I said that I want characters and teenagers with a personal connection in my complaints about Krueger only affecting one preschool class, but, I don’t know, I just don’t like it because in a way it undermines the other characters' importance even more so (I mean, they’re already not the main characters), and it also limits story possibilities and Freddy’s motivation. I mean, what’s Freddy going to do after he finally gets Nancy? Anything he does is going to have less motivation and meaning for him, and thus less interest for the audience. I will say that at least here, in having Nancy special to Freddy it explains why he killed the other kids first. In the originals, I disliked the fact that Nancy was special because of the implication that she lived in Krueger’s old house because it didn’t make sense in regards to Freddy’s return: why wouldn’t get kill Nancy first if he knew her parents moved into his home? In the reboot, he kills the other kids first in order to get Nancy scared enough to get her in a continuous coma.
Related to the Nancy character, why the hell did Nancy burn Krueger’s body at the end of the movie? I’m sure the filmmakers did so to mysteriously rid of Krueger’s body and create an opening for his return in the sequel, and that it’s somewhat poetic justice because Krueger’s being burned again and meant to look cool, but c’mon, it just doesn’t make sense for Nancy to do that. Maybe she was “in the moment.” Whatever. Not only did she burn his body, but she also burned the room and all evidence they had to bring to light what had taken place there all those years ago. It’s really silly.
Moving on, I didn’t like the implication that Fred Krueger was a child molester. Wes Craven’s original incarnation of Freddy in his mind was a child molester as well. I was never happy with that because there’s a big difference between a child molester and a child killer, and changing Krueger into a child molester totally changes his relationship with the kids that doesn’t match his killing them. Killing teenagers as the dream demon would be an extension of what he did while alive. Since he's now a child molester, the move from molesting kids to killing teenagers doesn't make much sense. If he was a child molester in real life, then why wouldn’t he just keep molesting kids in their dreams? Why would he waste time killing teenagers? As a child murderer, his actions as the dream demon makes much more sense.
One last tiny thing, and I could be looking too into it, but there’s a line where Freddy screams at Nancy, “Look at what you did to me!” or something to that effect. He’s referring to his face. This line stood out to me because I was confused about what exactly it meant. I mean, obviously he’s mad that he got burned, but does he also mean that he’s stuck to look like that? That he can’t control what he looks like in the dream world and is stuck with his disfigured face? Freddy in the originals always chose his burned look because it was scary and not because he was forced to stay like that. So I don’t know, it’s just a weird line, is all.
3. The Special Effects and Kills
I thought the special effects, gore, and kills were decent enough . I always dislike the use of CGI for stunts that could have easily been done with practical effects though. The scene where Freddy pushes through the wall above the sleeping Nancy just looked silly in this movie. In the original, done with practical effects, it’s a lot more creepier. In here, not only is it obviously not real, but the effect doesn’t look right: instead of looking like he’s pushing his face through the wall, it looks like the wall is cloth and when he pushes through its like he’s covered in flowing drapes, like a bad Dementor from the Harry Potter movies.
My favorite kill was the first one, Dean’s death. It’s a really simple kill, but it was great and it really showed right-off-the-bat how sadistic this Freddy was, forcing Dean to cut his own throat like that. And it wasn’t even a swift slice across the neck. This was a stab, and slow pull across the throat where you could feel the blade tearing through the skin. Awesome.
The second kill, Kris’, was okay. The original’s version is very iconic, and even now stands as a very visually stylish kill. In both versions, you can tell that both actresses are tied to wires, but in the original the wires don’t seem to distract from the kill. In fact, it even enhances it a little bit because you really get the sense of helplessness from the way she tumbles and frantically thrashes about in the air. In the reboot Kris looks and feels very stiff, just like the wires holding her and when she's tossed about through the air it looks like she's performing wire-fu. And the one slash across her body was disappointing too. In the original Freddy is just slashing and slicing all over her body, all the while she’s letting our screams of unbelievable torture and agony. All in all the second kill was fine, it just, in comparison it feels significantly lackluster.
Jesse’s kill felt kind of lazy. Something more creative could have been done. It reminded me of when Jason stabbed Freddy through the torso with Freddy’s own dismembered arm in Freddy vs. Jason. Jesse’s death looked alright though. It used CGI but it didn’t look that bad. It looked cheesy, though, when Freddy rose to standing in the background while Jesse's body fell in the foreground, like the Power Rangers' Mega Zord turns to the audience as a monster spins and explodes in the background (except that's cool). I did think the scene before hand though, Jesse and Freddy’s confrontation, was great though. And I guess it’s better than the 1984 kill of Jesse’s counterpart; Freddy hung him with a blanket in the cell. I don’t even think you saw Freddy during the scene, just the blanket wrapping around his neck while he slept.
Gwen, Nancy’s mother, had an pretty alright death. I pays homage to the ending of the original film. Again, uses CG gore, but it’s not as bad as it could have looked. At first I thought it was pretty cool, but then I realized that Freddy stabbed Gwen through the back of her skull and then thought it was dumb. It’s hard enough to get an axe through the skull so there’s no way he could have done that. So yeah, it was cool in a shallow way but just like Jesse’s death, it could have be used a bit more creativity. I think Freddy could have grabbed Gwen around the neck/shoulders with his other arm, and then stabbed her through the face with his gloved arm as he pulled her through the mirror. Also, by the way the scene was shot, the camera placement, it was pretty terrible that it was obvious something was going to happen with the mirror when Gwen stood right in front of it. A bit more finesse and subtlety would have gone a long way to make that moment he kills her more impressive.
In the end, the kills were passable. It’s the execution that hold them back from being cool. CG hardly ever works for gore. I’ve never understood why they don’t just use blood packs. No one has ever done CG blood right. I’m fine with the kills not being totally crazy and imaginative like Freddy’s kills in his Dream Master and Dream Warriors sequels, because I always figured that Freddy would still be getting used to his newfound dream powers in his first killings, just killing teenagers in some more conventional ways because reality is what he knows. He wouldn't even know to think in that kind crazy imaginiative of way. I just think the filmmakers could have used some creativity for their kills because Jesse’s and Gwen’s deaths seem a little lazy, like they thought of the kill and thought, “Cool, we got it,” and didn’t try to explore better deaths.
4. Directing II: Actors
I’ve already praised Samuel Bayer for his atmospheric direction and dark tone. I feel like his skills working with the actors were a little weak though. I know that that kind of thing is hard to tell in a movie, but there were a number of scenes where I felt the actors could have taken things a little farther with their performances if only the director had given them a push. This was most especially apparent to me when Jesse, portrayed by Thomas Dekker, witnesses the death of Kris before his eyes and his subsequent escape. I knew that it wasn’t just Dekker’s lack of skills, because his scene with Freddy in the boiler room was very good; he had a very real sense of debilitating fear and crying, which I always think is a shame that more horrors don’t show (a lot of dudes would totally breakdown in the extreme situations of slasher movies but cinema still chooses to push a macho’d-out version of fear that doesn’t seem like as real a response (who knows, maybe I’m just a pussy)). During Kris’ death scene, I thought Bayer could have pushed Dekker for a bit more fear and awe and chaos in his response. Not only did the girl he wants die right in front of him, but in a most unreal and incomprehensible manner. Quentin’s confrontation with Freddy could have used a little more intensity as well. It was fine as it was, especially with how most horror movies deal with these types of situations, but because this reboot takes such a darker and more realistic approach to its situations, then the reality of facing a child molester that‘s also killed your friends, looking the way he does, in your sleep, with your life at stake, should feel much heavier and intense and crazy. But again, this IS Bayer’s first full feature directorial effort, and working in music videos probably doesn’t allow him much opportunity to work with actors a lot so it’s forgiven to an extent.
5. The New Freddy Krueger
Overall: Jackie Earle Haley’s interpretation was great. Fantastic. I really dug his version of Fred Krueger. From the beginning I knew Jackie Earle Haley was a fantastic choice. Early on, in the news of the remake, names like Billy Bob Thornton were being thrown around by fans as possible choices for Freddy. And while I think that casting would have been fine, if not interesting, the choice of Jackie Earle Haley certainly seemed like a choice that showed a lot more thought was involved in creating a new Fred Krueger. Even though he had had his big break with geeks from playing Rorschach, I don’t think anyone would have thought of his name for the new Freddy. But it was one of those things that seemed like, “Of course! It seems so perfect, why didn’t I think of it?” Now, onto the logistics
5.1 The Face
Integral to the Freddy’s look is his burnt face. Just as soon as fans were informed of the darker tone of the reboot we learned that Freddy’s burned and melted face would be more realistic than the various looks Robert Englund wore as Freddy Krueger. The looks of Englund’s Krueger was never completely realistic or accurate (even though makeup man David Miller based his designs on photographs of burn victims), but he always retained a very menacing and sinister look. He actually looked like a dream demon, a being greater than a resurrected burned man. The look even contained the classically evil feature of the hooked nose, which traces back to the Wicked Witch of the East from The Wizard of Oz (see just how influential that movie was? I’m pretty certain the very imagery and concept of a green witch with such a pointed hat that flew around on a broomstick originates from The Wizard of Oz). All the while, Englund could be incredibly expressive under his makeup, giving performances that just sucked you into the screen, whether he was giving cheesy jokes or was demonically pissed off and ready to kill. The way the makeup formed around his eyes allowed them to be very animated and communicative Which therein lied the initial apprehension about the realistic approach. Sure, realistic is always scary because of its reality, but it could get in the way of expression, of which would then render the new design useless as so essential to Freddy as a horror icon has been his personality, of which his fellow horror icons have little.
Fortunately, my worries faded away as I watched Jackie Earle Haley perform on screen. The new design, being more realistic, has Freddy’s face misshapen. His nose looks melted and shrunken, chunks of flesh are missing from his cheeks, his lips look almost permanently pursed, and the all-important eyes are incredibly malformed, the skin so damaged as to force his eyes to be continuously squinting. Even with all this, Haley is able to act his ass off through the makeup and really deliver. That being said, I think there might have been a little room for improvement, as great as it looks already. Maybe they could have gone further with the melted look, not made his eyes so inhuman, I don’t know. Maybe give him more demon features. I don’t know. Just nitpicking. And to be honest, I can’t really recall any moments in the film where he smiled sinisterly like his former frequently did, but it’s alright if he didn’t because he was covered in ominous and creepy shadow a lot, which leads me to why he was probably so expressive in the first place...
5.2 The Voice
Haley’s voice is awesome. I liked it a lot. It’s new, it’s different, it’s not an imitation of Englund’s character. The voice sounds menacing, angry, gravelly without sounding like The Dark Knight or Rorschach, and also as if his vocal chords are damaged. His voice is very harsh and cold, and when he cracks a joke it’s retains that harshness while taking on a twisted wit. It’s great. His laugh sounds great as well. Haley’s Krueger voice was being worked on all throughout post-production and it paid off. His voice seemed a little off, maybe even a little goofy, in the teasers and trailers, but they really nailed it after all the work.
The voice worked in perfect conjunction with the new personality. I really liked how much it felt like Freddy was really playing with his kids the way a predator plays with its food, from the way he delivered the chilling and funny line he says when he was just trying to pet Kris’ dog, to his toying with Dean in the beginning. It was all great, mostly because there was such a great balance of this and his anger, his rage. I loved how angry Freddy was during his confrontation with Jesse, where we really see that even though he’s back as this demon, this is a pissed off Fred Krueger, a pissed off child molester that was murdered. We don’t really get to see that in the originals (A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge had a great angry Freddy though). I thought he might have said the “F” word one too many times, but that’s nothing, really. I loved seeing an angry Freddy with a dash of demented playfulness. And even this Freddy’s sense of humor was unique from Englund’s Freddy. Englund’s Freddy often made cheesy-yet-charming jokes, but Haley’s had a more sardonic sense of humor. It was twisted and cruel. I was really impressed with just how nuanced the filmmakers were with their Freddy’s characterization. Just as important and iconic as Englund’s facial design was his personality and voice, and Haley was able to rise the occasion and deliver a different take that was just as cool.
5.3 The Glove
The design of the glove was great as well (I might as well just state here that there really wasn’t anything I disliked about Haley's Freddy. Anything I disliked about Reboot Freddy, like his past and motivation, had nothing to do with Haley and was out of his hands.). I liked the thickness of the blades on the glove. There was a sense of weight to the blades, giving off the gravity of their lethality. The blades aren’t shiny at all, shorter, clearly metal, and you can very easily see the metal soldering, the craftsmanship in the work of the glove, something which I think gets overlooked (or simply changed) as the franchise grew in sequels. The glove is more brutal, more savage, more raw. I still like the previous gloves; there’s a disturbing sense of elegance in their design, but this glove was more animalistic almost. It certainly made the kills a little more plausible, considering the strength that would need to be involved (the single, long, deep cut across Kris’ whole torso, the penetration of the back of Gwen’s skull, etc.).
5.4 Stature
Haley’s a short dude, only 5’5.5” and I really thought it contributed to his characterization of Freddy. Englund, on the other hand, was 5’9.5” at the time he played Freddy. First and foremost, Haley’s short stature really evokes the child molester persona, the little man with low self-esteem and little social skills that wants to feel control and power over their surroundings and others, specifically, exploiting that imbalance of power between children and adults. Additionally, the short stature makes him more terrifying, if not a different quality of terror as exhibited by monsters of the mindless-giant variety like Jason Voorhees and Victor Crowley. And the short stature doesn’t make it comedic like a Leprechaun movie. It makes it more frightening because of the evil, power and threat of death that exists in such a regular looking dude, especially when you have guys like Kellan Lutz and Thomas Dekker, standing at 6’1” and 5’9.5” respectively, in fear of him.
5.5. Human Krueger
Going back to the human Krueger, Haley also delivered on this admirably. And he was able to give that complex shade of gray to help the audience question whether the character Fred Krueger the gardener really was innocent or not. His kindness was enough to convince you of the possibility of him being innocent, while also making the revelation that he wasn’t all the more chilling. He had a great meekness, and his fear and panic when confined to the boiler room was good too.
6. The Human Characters
6.1 Nancy Holbrook, played by Rooney Mara
The most important human to address is Nancy, who unfortunately is also the most boring of the cast. I just felt completely bored and uninterested in the reboot’s Nancy. I hated Jesse’s character, but at least there was still some form of emotional involvement with the character. I couldn’t really care less had the Nancy character died, because frankly there was little character there to begin with. I had no sense of personality from her. She was less than cardboard, less than a stock character. I didn’t get any sense of great fear or urgency from her. And it wasn’t even because she was brave or anything, because I didn’t feel any sense of strength from her either, which is paramount considering the horror film trope of the The Final Girl. The trope is that there always exists a female character that lasts to the end and exhibits feminine power by empowering herself with a weapon, usually phallic like a heavy axe, bat, etc., and slays the villain (this trope is wonderfully showcased in Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon. Think of it as a Shaun of the Dead, but for the Slasher genre instead of Zombie). While Nancy does this at end of the film by killing Krueger with the blade of the paper guillotine (which also seems to have been taken from the Freddy vs. Jason film) I did not get any sense of galvanization or fearlessness from her.
I was fine with Nancy being characterized as artsy and anti-social, but I couldn’t really believe it with what I saw on screen. I mean, I saw her doing art and whatnot, but unpopular? When she says to Quentin that the reason she never went out with him was because she’s not exactly the kind of person that can get along with people and is a loner or whatever, my immediate thought was, “Really? Could have fooled me, because I saw none of that characteristic in this movie.” I applaud the filmmakers for trying to give Nancy some character, but they didn’t really accomplish conveying character to the audience other than simply stating it.
So I don’t know if it was a lack of Rooney Mara’s acting talent, Bayer’s directorial skills, or lack of material in the script, but I have to say that Nancy was the least engaging and most disappointing character for me in the movie. Heather Langenkamp, who played Nancy in the original, was much more engaging, and along with Jamie Lee Curtis, stands as the quintessential Final Girl. Her fear, her resilience, her bravery all comes through the screen. And Langenkamp isn’t the best actress in the world; the are more than a couple times where lines and emotions feel flubbed or awkward, but the important parts are all done well. Let’s just say that I’m hoping Nancy is much better written in the sequel.
6.2 Quentin Smith, played by Kyle Gallner
I didn’t feel as indifferent towards Quentin, I thought his performance actually felt sincere and he was more believable. Adding religion always help in establishing a character but I wish they went a little further with it. I know that there’s a scene that was cut where Quentin’s dream was in a church. He was actually kind of likeable in a way too. I wasn’t exactly rooting for him to survive but I didn’t feel like he would just be a lump of stone falling had he died.
6.3 Jesse Braun, played by Thomas Dekker
I disliked Jesse, which I guess is good because he’s supposed to be a dick and it got me involved enough to hate him. I didn’t like Dekker’s performances though, as most of the time I felt a lack of effort, which again, I don’t know if it’s a result of Bayer’s directing skills. I liked Jesse’s counterpart in the original because he felt like a very real dickhead, and he was totally convincing when his girlfriend dies and he runs to Nancy for help. He really feels scared as shit and confused. Dekker’s scene with Nancy when he sneaks into her room wasn’t too great. I mean, he just witnessed his ex-girlfriend murdered, not to mention in such a surreal way, and he knows he’s going to be the prime suspect, but I hardly felt any sense panic or fright from him. I did, however, like his performance during Jesse’s confrontation with Freddy, as I stated earlier. The fear he displayed felt very real. Ultimately, I would have liked to see Kellan Lutz cast as Jesse instead of Dekker. They should have switched roles. It looks as though Lutz is a better actor, and just physically is more believable as the jerk boyfriend. But, maybe the filmmakers wanted to go against type, considering the teenage stereotypes of the movies of the 80s don't exist as much as they did these days.
6.4 Kris Fowles, played by Katie Cassidy
I really liked Cassidy’s performance of Kris. It may be because, of all the characters, Kris goes through the most psychological trauma, but still, Cassidy seemed to pull it off well. I never felt her performance could have been much better than what she gave. Her tears, her fear, her dread, all felt real. Not much to complain about here.
6.5 Dean Russell, played by Kellan Lutz
Just like with Kris, even with Dean’s little screen time, I enjoyed watching Lutz on screen. I’ve already praised his death scene, but he looked great as he was fighting Freddy when Freddy held the knife against his neck. It’s really unfortunate; I really liked Kellan Lutz and Katie Cassidy the most but they both had the two least important teenager roles.
6.6 Misc.
I really liked Clancy Brown as Quentin’s father and one of the parents to kill Krueger. He has a great look and voice, just great presence overall. And he’s convincing as a parent that did what he did. Connie Britton, who played Gwen, Nancy’s mother, was alright, I suppose. I don’t know why but she was a little annoying at times, but I’m not sure if it was because of the script and lines she had to say or if it was from her acting.
On a side note, it’s always great to see Aaron Yoo on screen. He played Marcus Yeon. I think he’s the only actor that can say they’ve appeared in a both a Friday the 13th film and Elm Street film. He played some Asian dude in the recent Friday remake (also probably the most likable character). Interestingly, he didn’t play a character that supplied comedic relief, but as one of the children from the preschool class that died. It’s crazy that he still gets all these roles and he’s 31 years old. But yeah, not much to say about him, it’s just cool that there’s an Asian in the movie lol.
==========================================================
IV. CONCLUSION
So, I’ve listed and explained dozens of things I disliked or was disappointed in. I know I’ve done a lot of complaining, but it’s only because I love the franchise so much and had very vivid ideas of my dream Elm Street movie. But I still want to get across that even with all I didn’t like about the movie, I did, in fact, like what was there enough to tip the scales in its favor. It was dark and serious, Haley’s Freddy was more than wonderful, and the reboot had an identity all its own. I like how a lot of things were a different take, and not just a case of better or worse. It was different. That being said I do look forward to the sequel; I know that Samuel Bayer is not returning, which is unfortunate because even though I pointed out shortcomings of his I think he did a great job and would like to see him grow, especially with working with actors. I hope in the future more effort will be put into Nancy’s character and that more practical effects will be used instead of CGI. After months and months of careful and wary excitement for the reboot and the treatment of one of my favorite film franchises, I’m glad with what was eventually produced. So yup, I know this review was more than twice as long as I expected, and probably eight times as long as you expected, but I hope you enjoyed it and I fueled some interest within you to look into the franchise.
Next time, we’ll be going back in time to 1984 to review the original A Nightmare on Elm Street. Stay tuned!
==========================================================
UPDATE - 5:30AM 5/26/10: So, I checked out other reviews (Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, Bloody-Disgusting, entc.) and lol apparently not a lot of other people liked the reboot. I don't know, is it that I love the franchise so much? And if it was that, how come I wasn't more hard on the reboot? Instead, I seem to be more forgiving. I don't know. I know that the reboot isn't really "scary" or disturbing, and I was caught onto the interesting note that it was weird that Krueger had gloves made in his basement but wasn't a child killer. I know that the screenwriters had total lapses in logic, and didn't really think through all of their choices. But, I still don't know why I was still able to enjoy it. Was it because I enjoyed seeing Freddy on the big-screen again? Who would be the one to be more hard on the movie, the viewer that's new to the series, or the viewer that's a hardcore fan? In general, I like to think that I'm able to view things significantly less subjectively than others. All I can say is that when I saw the movie that afternoon, I enjoyed what I watched and had a good time. Is the original better? Without the slightest hint of doubt in my mind. Was this movie terrible? No. Frustrating and disappointing? Sure. But, hey, I still liked it. And if this didn't convince you to go out and watch it, then hey, go watch the original. Not much argument there: It's incredible.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment