For those of you who know much about the Nightmare on Elm Street series, you know two things: that there were too many, and that nearly every installment after the first was a waste of time. They each had their own "creative" ideas to bring to the table, I'll give them that, but they pale in comparison to Wes Craven's original creation. Unfortunately, I know that it was a money-making horror series and that brings the inevitability of more, especially after the remake from 2010. In accepting that there will be more, I only ask one thing...don't remake Freddy's Revenge!
If they truly have to do a sequel to A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), do not try to copy the sequel from 1985 because it was horrible! They used Jackie Earle Haley to reinvent Freddy Krueger as more of a horror character and less of Robert Englund's wisecracking sadist, and although I hated the remake, I'd hate for Platinum Dunes to ruin what they have. I have three arguments behind my reasoning (although I don't think anyone will disagree with me).
1. The 1985 sequel didn't show enough Freddy!
The whole movie was centered around a high school student having nightmares, possibly struggling with his sexuality, and finding he has more and more homicidal tendencies. That's practically all that it's about! Where was Freddy?! There was only one scene that they truly needed Robert Englund for, and it wasn't until the end! You have to have more of Freddy in a possible modern sequel.
2. (spoilers ahead) This decade has had enough of possession movies!
The reason that you barely see Freddy in the movie is because the main character is getting possessed by him. I cannot stress enough how absolutely sick I am of possession horror movies. This girl opened a box, that one's parents made a deal with Satan, these kids released evil spirits...sick of it! We don't need any more possession movies.
3. Freddy's Revenge just wasn't scary...
Whether it be the lack of Freddy, the revenge against a naked gym teacher by slapping his bare "cheeks" with a towel, a fake parakeet bursting into flames, or the questionably gay teen being possessed, this movie wasn't scary! It began with a slow introduction into a good sequel, but then quickly veered into the oncoming traffic of "mediocrity". As I said, every installment had creative ideas, but what's the point of calling it a "horror film" if I only watch it with a blank stare on my face?
Every year, we see many horror movies. Some of them are good, while others are downright terrible. With this series, there are so many fans to satisfy while still creating something that will scare modern audiences, but with modern audiences growing "immune" to screams and scares, one has to ask...has the age of the horror movie died? Is there anything left to do or show, that modern audiences haven't seen before? I pray that I'm wrong to ask those things. Comment your thoughts on this or any other horror movie, remake, sequel, etc.
- 29A cameo by Rob Englund!Click to answer
- 4Screw Elm Street! I want Camp Crystal Lake!Click to answer
- 6Can they just stop entirely?Click to answer