In-Depth Movie Reviews & High Quality Trailers

Posts tagged “dreams

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

Nightmare on Elm Street 2010When I see the name Platinum Dunes attached to a horror remake, I hang my head in a wholly disheartened state.  While I did enjoy their remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre on its own merits, everything after that has been stuck in the mud sinking further and further into uninspired junk.  I’ve given them fair chances, but they have failed in such colossal ways.  The final nail in the coffin was this remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street.  A cluttered, drab, plodding mess is what this film turned out to be, and even not comparing it to Wes Craven’s original classic, it’s still a poorly executed film.

Five teenage friends living on one street all dream of a sinister man with a disfigured face, a frightening voice and a gardener’s glove with knives for fingers.  One by one, he terrorizes them within their dreams – where the rules are his and the only way out is to wake up.  But when one among them dies, they soon realize that what happens in their dreams happens for real and the only way to stay alive is to stay awake.  Buried in their past is a secret that has just begun to be revealed.  To save themselves, they must plunge into the mind of the most twisted nightmare of all: Freddy Krueger

Okay, remaking A Nightmare On Elm Street is not an outright terrible idea.  There are certainly ways to expand upon the original idea, enhance the effects, and execute it with a new, yet still effective style.  Surely, a sequel could just as easily do the same, but for whatever reason, despite the massive success that was Freddy vs. Jason and the fact that Robert Englund could easily reprise his iconic role, New Line Cinema chose to just remake the original.  However, no one involved in this film did anything to make this a film worth making.  I think it’s easier for a franchise to recover from a bad sequel than a bad remake.  With a bad sequel, you still have better moments in continuity and filmmaking efforts to build upon, and if the sequel is bad enough, like Highlander II bad, you can disassociate it from continuity.  A bad remake stops progress dead in its tracks because the beginning of this new continuity is not well received, fans don’t like the direction the property was rebooted into, and the general fan base doesn’t want to see more of it.  There’s next to nowhere to go, and that’s why you rarely see sequels to remakes.

Jackie Earle Haley is an excellent actor, and I have very much enjoyed him in a couple of roles.  There was a potential for him to deliver something impressive and unique here.  There are a few things he does that were new and original in terms of mannerisms.  However, by no fault of his own, neither the script nor director gave him anything worthwhile to sink his talent into.  Krueger is poorly developed as the filmmakers try to take him in a different direction, but the entire premise backfires in such a sloppy, brain dead way.  Trying to suggest that Krueger was wrongfully accused and unjustly murdered could work under more talented screenwriters and filmmakers, but it’s just handled stupidly and with no forethought.  However, the biggest issue, for me, was that Haley was too recognizable even under that very good make-up job.  When I saw this theatrically, I had just seen Haley regularly on the Fox television series Human Target, and so, his face was very familiar to me.  Even the voice he uses is essentially that of Rorschach from Watchmen with a slur.  It feels like a half thought out package, at best, which is an accurate blanket statement for this entire movie.

A problem arises with the performances by its young leads.  This film does quite a good job accurately portraying sleep deprivation with people being frayed, exhausted, drowsy, and essentially very drained of energy.  Unfortunately, that also creates a set of performances that are drab, lifeless, and generally disinteresting.  The thing is, in none of the previous Elm Street movies did I ever have a problem with the actors actually putting energy into their performances when they were meant to be sleep deprived.  For one, the make-up department did their jobs in weathering the young actors to look the part, much the same is done here, but secondly, energy and conviction are exactly what are needed to make these performances not just good but engaging.

Honestly, I don’t even think the lackluster acting is the fault of the cast.  There are some very strong talents here such as Rooney Mara as the film’s lead Nancy Holbrook and Thomas Dekker, who I know well from the Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles TV series.  I think the blame is entirely in the hands of director Samuel Bayer.  My point of proof here is Clancy Brown.  Let’s put The Kurgan aside.  Go watch Kathryn Bigelow’s Blue Steel, and you will see a charismatic, lively, and excellent performance by Brown in a very grounded role.  The main difference is that’s Kathryn Bigelow, an Academy Award winning director who has done increasingly incredible work over the years.  Samuel Bayer is making his feature film directorial debut here after almost two decades of directing nothing but music videos.  This movie does look fantastic, but beyond the great visuals, there is nothing here that impresses at all.  That’s what I keep seeing from all of these Platinum Dunes directors – movies that have excellent visuals and polished cinematography, but are very hollow, uninspired, and unimaginative.  Music video directors know how to make a good looking product, but have next to no experience working with actors to craft anything more than superficial performances.  Surely, sometimes you get a Russell Mulcahy or David Fincher, but there are far more directors like Samuel Bayer and Jonathan Liebesman that come around who just have little to no talent working with actors and drawing out a strong performance from them.  They are good visual storytellers, to a degree, but lack the multi-facetted skills required to be a full-fledged filmmaker.

I think the biggest shortfall of this film is the lack of genuine suspense and tension.  I was only afraid of another jump scare coming out of nowhere, and frankly, it kept me too on guard.  I kept bracing myself for another cheap scare.  This film just throws jump scare after jump scare after jump scare at you.  It takes no talent or skill to have someone jump out of the shadows with a loud musical stinger behind it.  It’s cheap and worthless.  And some of the gags are so blatantly setup that I called them before they even happened.  The result of all this is the fact that Freddy doesn’t feel built up enough.   He’s not a looming figure screwing around with you making you squirm.   He’s the boogeyman jumping out at the shadows every chance he gets like a kid on Halloween, and that’s simply a hollow, go-nowhere idea that shows the difference between a blunt, shallow filmmaker and someone like Wes Craven or James Wan who knows how to build up atmosphere, tension, suspense, and manipulate the nuanced aspects of a film to truly scare you.

Aside from the respectable, moody cinematography, I will give credit to the film in that the tone is kept serious.  There is no camp humor or jokey qualities to it.  The filmmakers try to keep it very solid, focused, and dramatic.  Sadly, the skill of the filmmakers is too thin to hold the weight that the film should have.  The entire film does feel like a product designed to grab dollars and be forgotten.  There is no artistic passion behind any of it, and the quality of the story suffers for it.

As I said in a previous Elm Street movie review, I do applaud that the various filmmakers always tried to introduce new, fresh ideas into the franchise, and never just laid back on carbon copy sequels.  The downside is that the new ideas haven’t always worked, and the entire plot of misdirection regarding Krueger’s possible wrongfully accused back story is poorly handled.  The way Krueger acts throughout the picture doesn’t lend credence to a man who was dealt a grave injustice, but an evil, sadistic man who enjoys torturing and slaughtering people.  All the while, our lead characters are running around trying to unravel a mystery that ends up being a red herring, and thus, it was all just a giant waste of the audience’s time and attention.  The idea is not executed well to misdirect an audience, and there is ultimately no pay-off for it, regardless.  Not to mention, it’s an extreme plot contrivance that every single one of these kids blocked out the memory of Fred Krueger and their time at that school.  So, it was a potentially interesting idea, but with how short-sighted every idea is in this film, it had no hope of actually developing into anything close to its potential.  That is another easy, blanket statement to apply to everything in this film.

The visual effects of this remake are really not very good.  For one, there’s no excuse whatsoever for CGI blood in an A Nightmare on Elm Street movie.  NONE!  It looks cheap and unconvincing.  There are a number of effects here that are passable, but the bad stuff really just jumps out at you.  Also, this movie proves that a simple practical effect and some artistic vision trumps digital effects.  The scene of Krueger pushing through the wall, which was achieved in the original with Robert Englund literally pushing himself against a latex wall above Heather Langenkamp, looks like flat, uninspired garbage in this film as a digital effect that seems like a leftover from The Frighteners.  And on a similar level is Platinum Dunes’ regular composer Steve Jablonski’s score.  Where Charles Bernstein’s score for the original was fresh and inspired with a perfect nursery rhyme style theme, Jablonski’s score is forgettable and entirely typical.  The original Elm Street theme appears only once, and that is when the film’s title card slams onto the screen.  It’s never heard again, and once again shows how little reverence these filmmakers had for the property they were dealing with.

And while the supporting cast is decently well acted, no one stands out.  No one really takes the stage and defines themselves apart from anyone else.  I do think it was a poor decision to not have a John Saxon style character here.  A mature adult character with compassion and a level head who could carry substantial weight with him.  Yes, there are actors here with that capability, but the writing and directing take no advantage of the talents that it does have to make these characters anything but mediocre, drab, and shallow.  The whole film does feel like it’s playing it a little too safe, including the acting.  If they pushed the boundaries further, maybe it would be more engaging and potentially scary.  Craven’s original film did things that were original, new, and innovative.  This remake just comes off as a tired, passionless piece of merchandise.

Quite frankly, there was no one trying on this film.  They followed the script like a blueprint and just created a film as flat as the paper that script was printed on.  One of Platinum Dunes’ big problems is that they keep getting music video directors who have no experience with a script, actors, or crafting scenes, only in creating a three minute long marketable image for a band.  They really need to get a real director who knows how to create an engaging ninety minute story with dimensional characters and coherent plotting.  Not to mention, a filmmaker who can actually make a suspenseful, scary horror film.


Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991)

Freddy's Dead The Final NightmareTo me, there is no defending this movie.  It is the worst film of this franchise, and a terrible supposed ending for Freddy Krueger.  As the progression of these films showed, Freddy transitioned from being a chilling icon of horror into being a jokey, cheesy clown, and this film goes right off the deep end of comedy in the most wretched ways.  Worse yet is that that’s just the beginning of this movie’s problems.  It tries to do something quirky and new, but the ideas it runs with are just so stupid that I cannot fathom how anyone embraced them as good ideas.  What stuns me more is that this film was written by the same person, Michael DeLuca, who wrote my favorite horror movie of all-time – John Carpenter’s In The Mouth of Madness.  Of course, Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare has nothing at all to do with the horror genre.

Dream monster Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) has finally killed all the children of his hometown of Springwood.  One amnesiac teenage survivor, known only as John Doe (Shon Greenblatt), is allowed to escape so that Freddy may expand his power beyond the town.  John soon comes into the care of a youth shelter and Dr. Maggie Burroughs (Lisa Zane), who has a forgotten past of her own as Krueger’s own daughter.  This revelation is what can facilitate Freddy’s freedom to engulf the world in nightmares.  However, she discovers the demonic origin of his powers and meets him head-on in a final showdown.

This is a cluttered mess of a movie, but I’ll tell you what I like about it which isn’t much.  Since Freddy’s Dead is set a decade in the future, there’s obviously a detailed history that we are unaware of, and thus, it creates an inherent mystery.  It lays a foreboding mystique over Krueger’s motivations and schemes.  Of course, this film squanders all of that hint of potential by not exploring any of that untold history at all.  It concerns us solely with this bland, boring mystery about Freddy’s kid and Krueger’s origins.  The misdirection of who is Freddy’s kid is terribly weak and completely uninteresting.  John is a teenager, and it is stated in the movie that Freddy’s child was taken away from him in 1966 – thirty-five years before the time this film is set.  Even then, Freddy was probably already dead by the time John was born.  There was an early idea that John would have been Jacob, Alice’s son from The Dream Child, but that is clearly impossible as he’s too old.  Maggie being Freddy’s daughter is also a completely new thing that comes out of nowhere.  Obviously, this is a brand new thing created for this movie alone, but it doesn’t take into the thought that if Freddy had this child out there all this time that he would’ve taken advantage of her far earlier than now.

This is indicative of how this film presents ideas and questions, but the filmmakers put in no time or effort to think them through.  They don’t pull from the established continuity or characters we’ve connected with through the previous five movies.  While a few of the films have introduced new ideas to Freddy’s origins, they’ve been largely smart ideas that flow organically from what had come before.  These filmmakers also don’t rationalize the motivations or thought processes of its characters to have anything really make any sense.  Beyond that, it constantly embraces the ridiculous as if this was meant to be a horribly bad comedy.  The story has a very shaky foundation, and anything built upon it is constantly crumbling apart.  By the end, it’s an eye sore of a disaster.

Also, this film brings up an intriguing question of whatever happened to Alice from The Dream Master and The Dream Child?  This character that defeated Freddy twice, and clearly had the power to keep him at bay is never eluded to once in this movie.  Freddy’s wiped out the child population of Springwood, and turned it into a bizarre wasteland of delusional adults.  Did Alice get killed, or did she just runaway and let it happen?  If Freddy killed her, that would be an extremely pivotal thing for fans and audiences to know and actually see.  If she turned her back on him, that’s also a story I’d like to see explored.  Why would his biggest, most powerful nemesis not be there to combat him to the bitter end?  These questions have no remote answer to them.  Instead, we’re burdened with a couple of lead characters that I couldn’t give a damn about.

I cannot say that Shon Greenblatt was a very good casting choice.  He’s not terrible, but he just has nothing charismatic or special to offer in this role.  He has practically the same expression through every single scene regardless of he’s confident, angry, afraid, or confused.  He fails to elicit any sense of caring from me.  This is also due to how stupid and flat his character happens to be.  He exercises no perceptive intellect, and kind of comes off as arrogant once he thinks he’s Freddy’s kid.  He forms this conclusion based on nothing definitive, and just jumps around from one idiotic, self-important conclusion to another.  Neither Greenblatt nor the direction do anything to make this a character you’re going to care about one way or another.

Lisa Zane’s character is also someone I couldn’t really care about.  The film takes almost an hour before it starts going into any detail about Maggie, and even then, it’s extremely minimal stuff just to facilitate a weak connection between her and Freddy.  Beyond that, I ask myself the questions of why am I supposed to care at all about this brand new character that this film takes next to time to develop?  What’s so special about this character that she is meant to be the one to put the supposed final nail in Freddy’s coffin?  And again, why the hell aren’t we following Alice Johnson charge headlong into a final, epic battle with Freddy?  The filmmakers didn’t need to manufacture a child for Freddy in order to explore his back story, and even that idea is so lazily implemented.  No one puts forth any effort to make that anything an audience should invest themselves in.  Most importantly, Lisa Zane really does nothing with this character.  The performance is very hollow, and like Greenblatt, she essentially has one facial expression for every emotion in every scene.

The only cool and bad ass member of this cast is Yaphet Kotto, and that’s because he is Yaphet Kotto.  I don’t think it’s possible for him not to be awesome in any role.  They should’ve made the film more about his character, who is only named Doc.  He’s the one that figures everything out, and has the knowledge and perception to battle Krueger on his own ground.  Unfortunately, he probably has the least amount of screentime, and his talent is almost entirely wasted opposite such bland characters and cast members.  With this film, it seems that the less significant your character is, or the less screentime you are given, the better your performance will be.

For instance, this film’s new set of teens are pretty good characters filled by charismatic actors.  The most notable among them is Breckin Meyer in his first feature film role.  You can see all of his signature personality and talent on display here.  Lezlie Deane is the most proactive of them all as Tracy showing a lot of fight and toughness.  She doesn’t take much attitude from anyone.  Ricky Dean Logan has a nice dash of attitude while still being quite likable as Carlos, the kid with the hearing aid.  Freddy ends up screwing with him royally via his hearing aid by amplifying every little sound to deafening levels.  It’s too bad that it’s so undermined by the absolutely cartoonish behavior of Freddy.

Knowing that even Englund himself agreed to make this movie like a Bugs Bunny cartoon makes my head hurt.  Up until this point, he was able to maintain some integrity with the character, but here, it just all gets flushed right down the toilet.  There is no menace, no sense of a frightening killer anywhere within this movie.  Englund jumps the proverbial shark with this performance making Krueger a total, cringe inducing cartoon that really craps all over the entire franchise.  The make-up job also follows that mentality with a horribly cheap and rubbery prosthetics job constantly exposed in bright light.

The visual effects, in general, are largely bad.  They tried to use some low budget CGI, but it looks no better than mid-grade optical effects, at best.  There are a few shots that are fine, but the visual effects do take an obvious nose dive decline in quality from the last few films.  Mixed with the poor 3D sequence, it just becomes cringeable to look at.  The dream demons themselves are horrendous and laughable in their brief appearance.  The practical effects from master John Carl Buechler are very good in most respects, but the film is so terribly light on kills and good imagination that there’s hardly much of a showcase for Buchler’s brilliant talents.

I really like the soundtrack for this film to the point where I tracked it down years ago on CD.  It has many great tracks mainly from the Goo Goo Dolls, and a solid end titles track from Iggy Pop.  I can’t say I’m all that keen on how, early on, the film drives this soundtrack right into the blatant forefront.  Every few minutes another song kicks in undermining the score.  For certain types of films, this sort of thing works, but for what should be a horror movie, it doesn’t at all.  Of course, even the score that this film has is almost entirely dismissible and hardly noticeable.

The third act of this movie is such garbage.  First off, the horrible 3D gimmick of Maggie putting on 3D glasses to enter Freddy’s mind is face palmingly bad.  Again, Freddy’s a horribly bad joke in this movie, and so, I don’t give a damn about his back story at this point.  Maggie is a hollow, boring protagonist that I care even less about.  So, I simply don’t care about her traversing through Freddy’s memories, or seeing how he became a serial killer or a dream demon.  The only highlight is Alice Cooper appearing in a cameo as his father, but it’s nowhere near being a saving grace.  The entire fight between Maggie and Freddy is just crap.  It’s essentially a street fight with conventional weapons with absolutely no fantastical qualities whatsoever.  After all of the supernatural, paranormal, metaphysical ways they’ve defeated Freddy in the past five movies, these filmmakers resort to a damn pipe bomb.  Maggie pulls him into the real world, and blows him up with a pipe bomb.  You have got to be kidding me.  How creatively bankrupt must you be to go forward with that, and have it end with Maggie being all smug about it?  I’ll take the toxic waste bath in Jason Takes Manhattan over this insulting garbage.  At least that showed a semblance of imagination and effort.

Any of the lesser grade sequels could at least be chalked up to poor execution, but this movie is a disaster from the concept and script onward.  I don’t think this is a well directed movie by Rachel Talalay at all.  It’s not well conceived, not well written, and it’s not well acted where it counts.  Freddy’s Dead bares no resemblance to a horror movie at all.  It doesn’t even put forth the smallest effort to establish a mood or atmosphere conducive to scaring even the most timid audience.  There’s so much cartoony garbage stinking up the movie that you couldn’t break out of it if you tried.  This movie SUCKS SO FUCKING BAD!  I strongly avoid using that kind of profanity in my reviews, but when a movie elicits that strong of a negative emotion from me, there is no way I could express my vehement disdain any other way.  It’s like a middle finger pointed straight at the audience in crappy 3D.  This film also has no sense of transition.  There are a few scenes that just abruptly end, jarring us into the next scene without a single mind towards a segue.  You feel the scene is building towards something more, but it takes a sharp turn into a completely different scene.  This is bad plotting, poor pacing, and just sloppy editing.  Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare has no qualities that could possibly redeem it because it was so royally screwed from its inception.

From here, the only salvation for Freddy Krueger was Wes Craven and Jason Voorhees.  The first was a creative salvation, and the second was a financial salvation.  Sure, this movie was a box office success, but there is nothing within this film that deserved that success.  It is one of the absolute worst sequels I have ever seen, regardless of genre.  I would log it next to Alien vs. Predator because it is that insulting in its ideas, and piss poor in its filmmaking competency.  Also, this film absolutely did not need an obnoxious cameo by Roseanne and Tom Arnold.  They standout like a sore thumb, but thankfully, it’s only for a minute.  However, it’s just another stamp of the filmmakers not taking this film seriously or respecting where this franchise came from.  Even separated from the franchise, this is still a terrible movie through and through.  So many of those creatively involved with it should be ashamed that they did this to Freddy Krueger.  Instead of shifting gears and bringing the icon back to his serious roots of horror, they plunge off the deep end, and drown him in a comedy sewage.  I could go on and on calling this film every bad name in the book, but I think I’ve said plenty.  Thank goodness that Wes Craven would bring respectability back to the franchise with New Nightmare, which I did review last October.  Skip this movie and watch that one.  It’s a massively, exponentially superior film on every level.


A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989)

Nightmare on Elm Street 5This is where the film franchise took a serious slip and fall misstep.  Someone realized that Freddy Krueger was on the verge of becoming a bad punchline, and so, steps were taken to make this a darker, more mature sequel.  Rushed out into theatres just under a year after The Dream Master, director Stephen Hopkins did all he could to deliver a solid film, but there was too many misconceived qualities to be what the studio desired.  This was the lowest grossing film of the series up to that point, and the reasons why are evident here.

Having survived and seemingly defeated him, Alice Johnson (Lisa Wilcox) finds the deadly dreams of Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) starting once again.  This time, the taunting murderer is striking through the sleeping mind of Alice’s unborn child.  His intention is to be “born again” into the real world at the expense of Alice’s new circle of friends.  The only one who can stop Freddy is his dead mother, but can Alice free her spirit in time to save her own son?

For me, the biggest and most evident issue with The Dream Child is that it tries to tie campy, overblown humorous elements in with a gothic looking slasher film, and that just curls my upper lip in disgust.  Stephen Hopkins certainly directs a very well shot movie, but that gothic production design is soaked in so much brown that it’s not inviting to look at.  That visual style is really contained within the dream world, but that has always been the more fantastical and visually intriguing aspect of these films.  Hopkins does have a great eye for stylish visuals, but it is a very drab film to look at in most cases.  If it had a more subtle, realistic color palette like Craven’s original, or followed along the vibrant color schemes of Renny Harlin’s The Dream Master, this may have been a more visually exciting movie.

Lisa Wilcox is able to stretch out and expand upon her previous performance as Alice.  She’s able to take that strong fighter, and add the emotional touches of heart and depth into her.  It feels very organic from how she initially was in The Dream Master, but just melding that with her new found strength.  Wilcox also brings out the heartache and inner turmoil of Alice with endearing charm and sympathy.  She’s pushed to new limits, fighting to save not only her friends, but the life of her newly conceived son, which Wilcox embraces with a great deal of depth and motivation.  All around, she leads this film with a lot of confidence continuing on as an inspiring hero for this franchise.  I feel it’s unfortunate that she is never revisited again because Lisa Wilcox is such a solid and versatile talent, and really gave us a standout character to rival Nancy Thompson amongst fans.

Now, Alice’s new cast of friends are not filled by bad actors.  They are quite good, but the characters just aren’t that appealing or entertaining.  The closest we get is the comic book artist Mark.  He’s decently fun, but is definitely downplayed.  He has some good dramatic moments, and showcases some heart at times.  It’s a shame that actor Joe Seely has nothing more to work with here because he seemed to have the potential to really breakout with a more entertaining performance.  With Yvonne, I understand the idea of the friend that doesn’t always agree with you, but she is too abrasive too often.  There is too much friction between her and Alice for my liking to where I just didn’t like the character.  With all the teenagers that have been killed by Freddy in this town, you’d think she would actually wake up to the truth and start acting more open-mindedly.  Instead, she remains a stubborn minded person dismissing her friends claims instead of trying to help them through most of the film.  That’s a friend I wouldn’t care to have.  Greta, the more upper class type friend, just doesn’t have much going for her as a character.  The actress portraying Greta’s mother, however, is just terrible all the way through.  She overacts the part to horrendously cartoonish levels.  Her performance is very forewarning of some of what we’d get in Freddy’s Dead.

I found the kid who plays Jacob, Whitby Hertford, to be rather unappealing to look at and rather annoying.  There was nothing about his performance that made me feel sympathy for him at all.  Even worse is that the make-up department did all they could to make him look uglier, creepier.  Surely, that was the intent, but part of the purpose of Jacob is to make him sympathetic; to make him someone you want to see saved from Krueger’s clutches.  I couldn’t care any less about him if I tried.  I really feel he should have been played more innocently, and have Freddy gradually corrupt him more and more to motivate sympathy from an audience and put more urgency upon Alice to act quickly.

Ten years ago, I was able to do an email based interview with Robert Englund, and from that, I gained insight into the shift in the tone and portrayal of Freddy Krueger from scary and serious to cheesy and comical.  He said, and I quote, “I feel Freddy should be dark, but directors and fans like his dark humor.  In many cases during the filming of all the movies I would give a dark and a comical take for certain scenes.  Director liked the “button” that a laugh gives so they would often opt for the more comical take in the editing room.”  The choice to take Freddy into comical territory was indeed outside of Englund’s control, and he simply gave the filmmakers the best performance he could based on what they wanted.  This film delves deeply into the comical villain portrayal, and thus, the scare factor of Freddy Krueger is severely drained.  He was turned into a twisted clown that might make some people laugh, but is almost guaranteed not to scare you at all.  What is scary is that this is not the worst it would get to being.

The make-up work on Freddy does fall down in quality as he appears cheap and rubbery.  This is a byproduct of the rushed production schedule.  However, many of the various practical effects are impressive such as the motorcycle death sequence that seems straight out of Videodrome.  There are some cool visual effects used when Mark gets sucked into his comic books, but it was far from anything new.  It was mostly a retread of the classic a-Ha music video for “Take On Me.”  The climax features effects and designs directly copying from M.C. Escher’s famous artwork Relativity with all the upside down staircases.  It’s a fine idea, but it’s less surreal and just more whacky and silly.  I’ve seen it done in Looney Tunes cartoons before, and so, I would hardly associate it with a frightening, vertigo-like nightmare.  There are a number of very good visual effects in The Dream Child, but the ideas behind many of them aren’t all that great.  Plus, they seem even more dated than those of The Dream Master.

And of course, since this film deals with a pregnancy, I honestly don’t think that A Nightmare On Elm Street movie is the proper platform to debate the issue of abortion.  I am not going to inject my feelings on the issue here either.  This film brings it up as a serious issue for Alice to contend with, but she remains strong in her decision to keep the child.  People don’t go into a movie like this to have hot button socio-political issues debated.  They are there to have a fun time being scared.  Adding this sort of subject matter into the movie likely turned more than a few people off to it.  While it is not an aspect of the film that really bothers me, it’s just not something that needed to exist in a slasher movie.

This sequel also feels uneven in its plotting, and rather thin in certainly places.  The film is front loaded with establishing every element of this plot to where it leaves a lot of muddled meandering in the middle.  It probably rushes us into the thick of the story quicker than necessary.  Then, the film progresses past all of that to where it kind of goes through the slasher movie motions to rack up the body count.  It’s not until the final act that any of these plot elements are actively dealt with, and even then, it becomes very repetitive just in order to fill in the remaining runtime.  That’s odd to say since the film ends very quickly after Freddy is dispatched with, but still struggles to come in under the 90 minute mark.  The third act confrontation with Freddy runs around in circles, both literally and figuratively, to where it just doesn’t feel exciting.  Again, I didn’t care a thing for this creepy child Jacob to invest myself in Alice’s desire to protect him, and the filmmakers don’t really do anything to make him anyone to care about.  So, having Alice and Freddy chase him around the dream world for the whole third act was just tedious.  I generally like the further exploration of Freddy’s origins and bringing Amanda Krueger back into the fold from Dream Warriors.  I just don’t think all of these elements have enough impact on the climax as they likely were supposed to.  I understand not trying to close the door on Freddy, again, since he always comes back, but not trying to have a satisfying and solid ending to your movie is a terrible approach to have.

While Stephen Hopkins tried to take this into a darker, grittier look, it is the script that fundamentally sabotages that effort.  I’m even hard pressed to say if this is even a potentially good concept because it is executed so poorly from a clunky screenplay.  This is what you get when you rush the movie into theatres fifty-one weeks after the original.  Back in 1989, it took that long just to get a movie from theatres onto home video.  When you slow down, and take your time to find the right story and refine the concept, you will get a better movie in the end.  Instead, The Dream Child is enough of a mess to call this a major pothole in the steady road of success of this franchise.  While it was profitable, it did fall especially below expectations.  Thus, New Line Cinema decided to begin plotting Freddy’s supposedly ultimate demise with what would be the most horrendous movie of this entire franchise.  As for this sequel, ultimately, neither the attempt at a darker, more mature tone nor Englund’s best efforts could save it.  The film is watchable, but not especially satisfying.


A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988)

Nightmare on Elm Street 4With the strong success of the third movie, New Line Cinema struck their biggest gold with this 1988 sequel helmed by Finnish director Renny Harlin.  The Dream Master takes a lot of what made Dream Warriors marketable and entertaining and amplified it.  This is definitely the most mainstream film in the franchise with many pop culture sensibilities, and that resulted in the largest box office take until 2003’s Freddy vs. Jason.  For many years I had formed a much more negative opinion of this film, but now that I’ve watched it again, I can say that this is a very well made movie.  However, I cannot say that it’s a very effective horror movie.

Proving there’s no rest for the wicked, the unspeakably evil Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) is again resurrected from the grave to wreak havoc upon those who dare to dream, but this time, he faces a powerful new adversary.  As her friends succumb one by one to Freddy’s wrath, telepathically gifted Kristen Parker (Tuesday Knight) embarks on a desperate mission to destroy the satanic dream stalker and release the tortured souls of his victims.  However, her power will have to be passed to her friend Alice Johnson (Lisa Wilcox) as she has the ability to overcome Freddy’s control, and absorb the power of her slain friends to end Krueger once and for all.

I do enjoy a couple of Renny Harlin’s movies.  The Adventures of Ford Fairlane and Die Hard 2 are definite favorites of mine, and I am anxious to watch Cliffhanger very soon.  However, I don’t think horror really is his strong suit, despite how gory his early films are.  I will certainly hand it to him for having a great handle on gore effects, and his films usually look damn good on all levels.  Still, this film is a long way removed from the brilliant execution of chilling suspense and the masterful enveloping experience of terror of Wes Craven’s original classic.  However, on a technical level, this is probably the best made film of the franchise until New Nightmare.  Harlin just knows how to move his camera in smart, cinematic ways.  There seems to be more camera movement overall with some steadicam work, and smart, engaging camera angles.  This is a very polished looking film having nearly triple the budget of Dream Warriors, and it shows through in all aspects.  It has vibrant colors, but a good mix of light and dark.  The whole movie feels just a little more theatrical in its lighting as well.  Thus, the mood is a little more artistically crafted, visually, than Dream Warriors, but it does lack a good dose of suspense.  The film has its gore, its violence, and its imagination in high gear, but doesn’t make itself all that scary.

This film loses a lot of potential emotional resonance having to recast Kristen Parker with Tuesday Knight.  There was apparently a turbulent experience for Patricia Arquette on the previous movie, and for possibly other reasons as well, she chose not to reprise the role of Kristen.  Knight does an okay job, but it really feels like a filler role to motivate the plot along quickly to put Alice in the lead role.  It also comes down to how she is written.  There is no motivation given for why she’s convinced that Freddy’s coming back to get her, and it feels like a large step backwards for the character.  She seemed to evolve a little in last film to a stronger protagonist, and she feels regressed to a more timid, easily spooked person here.

Returning from Dream Warriors are Ken Sagoes and Rodney Eastman as Kincaid and Joey, respectively.  They still deliver perfectly to what they did in the previous movie, but their chemistry with Knight is not as good as it was with Arquette.  I really like that The Dream Master feels like a direct sequel by bringing back these surviving characters while segueing into a new cast.  We spend the first act with them, fearing for their lives from Freddy’s imminent rampage of revenge, but then, it shifts into another gear that once again builds upon the premise of the series.  It feels like Freddy is triumphing here as an nearly indomitable force, and we need a stronger hero with special powers to combat him.

This film greatly builds Alice up as our new heroine.  We get glimpses into her emotional and mental state, both affectionate and angered, from under her meek appearance.  The film nicely balances establishing her as a well rounded character in all aspects while keeping Kristen also in the forefront in a more troubled state.  Lisa Wilcox proves to be a solid actress with fine range.  We see her take Alice from this lowly, slightly introverted young woman to a vibrant, tough fighter.  Yet, we get moments of endearing sweetness and heart making her easy to sympathize with.  We follow Alice as she grows into this awesome character, and delivers in spades as an action hero that a film of this sort required.

I think the idea of Alice gaining the powers of her friends as Freddy kills them is great.  It creates a fresh dynamic in the story that while Alice suffers the grief of her dying friends, she becomes stronger by them so that she can battle Freddy.  He is savagely tearing through them at a fast rate making the situation all that more dire and seemingly insurmountable.  It definitely moves the film along at a tight pace, and makes for an entertaining and original sequel.  I will hand it to the A Nightmare On Elm Street movies for always seeking out new ideas so that no film feels like a carbon copy of another.  The ideas might not always work, but there’s at least an effort put forth most times.

Since this film amplifies all of the entertaining qualities of the previous movie, we get a Freddy Krueger who cracks more jokes, throws out more one-liners, and has significantly more screentime.  Robert Englund still does a very good job with this material maintaining his own standards of integrity as an actor.  Unfortunately, the portrayal of Freddy in this film just falls further away from that frightening figure that stalks the dark recesses of your worst nightmares.  For crying out loud, he is seen in broad daylight on a sunny beach with a pair of sunglasses on.  That’s one of my least desirable images from this franchise.  It’s the total stark opposite environment to place Fred Krueger in.  The scene in question has Kristen going into her own idyllic dream, and then, Freddy crashes it in a very Jaws homage fashion.  The better way to do this would be to have the sky go dark and stormy, and have Freddy invade her dream in a more ominous way.  Keeping Freddy in the shadows is where he is the most effective, and while there is some of that here, the liberties taken just don’t work to maintaining him as a scary figure.

The effects work here is amazing and rather ambitious.  The waterbed scene is great in both concept and execution as Joey tries to reach the naked beauty inside, but then, gets gutted by Freddy.  The most shocking and disgusting effects are when Freddy goes after Debbie, and she is transformed into a insect piece by piece.  Even for as much gross stuff as I’ve seen in horror movies, this sequence still makes me cringe and my stomach turn.  It’s no wonder I haven’t worked up the nerve to watch David Cronenberg’s The Fly.  The big ending to the climax where the souls are fighting to break out of Freddy is greatly elaborate and highly impressive.  Many different effects were used to pull this off, and they cut together seamlessly and to fantastic effect.  While some of the effects are dated and a little cheesy, they still work for the film’s overall style, and were certainly high grade for their time.

The music is very pop oriented with a mostly synthesizer style score creating a great ambient mystique.  It is a perfectly 80’s soundtrack with a number of really good rock tracks from Billy Idol, Dramarama, Vinnie Vincent Invasion, and Tuesday Knight herself performing the opening title track “Nightmares.”  I really like the sound of all of it because it gives the film energy, style, and a little bit of edge.  It helps to energize the movie and the audience as events unfold and build up to a really great climax.

I now do really like this movie.  It is fun, entertaining, exciting, and quite smart in a number of ways.  Renny Harlin does a great job with the well developed screenplay.  Unfortunately, where it fails is in actually in the horror department.  I’m not sure what to classify this movie as because it does have gruesome, nightmarish imagery, and great effects along with a solidly put together cinematic atmosphere.  There’s just not much here to scare an audience with outside of the graphic scenes of gore.  There’s very little effort put into building up tension or suspense, which are key to roping an audience in tightly.  It’s a fun, dark fantasy with a pitch perfect pop culture sensibility and excellent violent, gory moments.  The Dream Master is a largely fun time spent with a very capable and enjoyable cast, and so, it is easy to see why this was such a big box office success.  I just wish there was more to be potentially scared about in this tightly paced 93 minute runtime.


A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)

Nightmare on Elm Street 3Sequels tend to be an inferior breed of movie, especially in the horror genre.  However, sometimes, when you get the right mix of talent together, and especially getting the input of series creator Wes Craven, you can create one the most beloved films in the entire franchise.  Freddy’s Revenge fell off-track with the ideas and mythos of Freddy Krueger, but this film, Dream Warriors, got it solidly back on track in stellar, awesome ways.

The last of the Elm Street kids are now at a psychiatric ward where Freddy Kruger (Robert Englund) haunts their dreams with unspeakable horrors.  Their newest fellow patient is Kristen Parker (Patricia Arquette) who has the ability to pull others into her dreams.  Their only hope is dream researcher and fellow survivor Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp), who helps them battle the supernatural psycho on his own hellish turf.

From the beginning, you can see that this film is again embracing the atmosphere and surreal qualities of Craven’s original.  It feels directly in synch on numerous levels.  The opening dream sequence is very nerve-racking and visually captivating.  The first ten minutes of this sequel is better than anything in all of Freddy’s Revenge.  Overall, it features a great and imaginative collection of nightmare sequences that are all shot and lit in very interesting and moody ways to evoke mysterious and frightening feelings from an audience.  This is also a greatly paced film balancing its attention amongst this ensemble cast exceptionally well, and moving the story forward tightly.

Bringing back Nancy was a stroke of genius, and it continues her story purposefully and smartly.  She’s grown and matured to a point where she can truly help these troubled kids band together and fight Kruger and their own fears.  Heather Langenkamp does a lot of great work reprising this role bringing confidence and compassion to Nancy.  Teaming her with Patricia Arquette results in a strong pairing that work excellently off one another.  Kristen grows stronger through Nancy, as does everyone, but she is clearly the highlight.  Nancy fully passes the torch to Kristen in many ways, and Patricia Arquette does a truly standout acting job here.  I love that this movie isn’t just about Nancy.  It’s about all of these great, dimensional characters coming together to combat Krueger as a force to defeat him in grand fashion.

One of those notably great characters is Dr. Neil Gordon.  There is a lot of heart and compassion in Craig Wasson’s performance.  You can see how much Dr. Gordon cares for these kids, and even Nancy to an extent.  I like that he has an arc of sorts here having his mind open to new possibilities, and growing into a stronger character when he deals with Donald Thompson.  He becomes more than just a caring doctor.  He becomes one that will fight for what he believes in.  The subtle subplot with Sister Mary Helena helps evolve his character in clever ways so he can believe in more than just science to lay Freddy Krueger to rest.

Also returning is John Saxon as a much more down-and-out Donald Thompson.  No longer a Police Lieutenant, he’s a drunkard security guard who did go into a downward spiral after the events of the first movie.  It’s a stark contrast of a performance, but Saxon is such an incredible actor that he achieves it remarkably well.  The progression of the character is handled with appropriate weight and integrity.  This film takes its characters seriously and treats them with respect.  Thus, it makes for a film with serious weight and integrity on the whole, which I really respect.

The rest of this young cast is absolutely superb.  They embody each character’s distinct personalities with a great deal of dedication and talent.  It’s a golden example of putting together a great ensemble cast for a horror movie.  While each character has emotional weaknesses, they have greater strengths which are expertly bonded together to become the titular Dream Warriors.  It’s also a great treat seeing a fairly young and slender Larry Fishburne as the upbeat and charismatic orderly Max.  He is very charming showing great energy and enthusiasm.

Now, this film was where Freddy started to become a little lighter in tone and throwing out a few wisecracks.  Even the low, deep voice is not consistently present, likely to accommodate that variation in tone.  However, he’s still an effective, threatening villain due to Robert Englund’s performance.  He still commands the frame, and has a great, imposing presence.  While there seems to be less screentime for Freddy here, the fear of him permeates throughout the film, and the threat of him is almost omnipresent.  The movie builds him up, and in a way, gives him more impact when he does strike.  He is far more powerful than ever before, and that makes for much more elaborate dream sequences and scenarios.  Dream Warriors also begins to unveil a little of his back story in regards to being the “son of a hundred maniacs,” which is great stuff.

With the imagination back in full force, the practical and visual effects shine through excellently.  There is plenty of gore on display that is effectively designed to unnerve.  The most memorable work, both in make-up and visual effects, are when Freddy uses Phillip’s own tendons to walk him to his death like a marionette, and the full-on Freddy serpent that attempts to eat Kristen early on.  Even in the climax, we get some really good stop motion animation, and some all around solid visual effects composites.  Where the previous sequel was very lacking in imaginative nightmares, this film is packed with them, and they all tie in perfectly with the story.  They are all crafted with solid suspense and smart scares.  I will grant that this film has more of a fun factor than the first, and that does require a little loosening of the horror tone.  However, this movie still delivers on the horror and frightening visuals due largely to the excellent effects work, and the talent of director Chuck Russell.

We are also treated to a greatly shot film.  The cinematographer uses subtle camera movements highlighting poignant moments, and the dream sequences all have great visual vibrancy.  Shadowy blues are used for the more haunting or mysterious scenes, and fiery reds are utilized when in the depths of Freddy’s surreal boiler room.  The look of Dream Warriors is not as dark and frightening as the first film, but instead, uses visual atmosphere to great effect.  Director Chuck Russell really approached this film seriously, not deteriorating it into silly, indulgent territory, and how it is photographed entirely reflects that intention.

Dream Warriors also features some great music, starting with the score from Angelo Badalamenti.  He works in the Charles Bernstein theme very well, and builds a great atmosphere beyond that.  He reflects the tone of dramatic weight and chilling horror with exceptional skill.  It is such a damn good horror film score, as should be no surprise from David Lynch’s regular composer from Blue Velvet onward.

And of course, the classic songs from Dokken helped break the metal band into a wide audience.  This film entirely exposed me to them between Into The Fire and the title track Dream Warriors.  They are two excellent songs, and they complement this more MTV styled sequel that hits you with more vibrant and stylized visuals.  You can definitely tell that Dokken was involved early on as Taryn is wearing one of their T-shirts in her first scene.  Of course, there songs are a small part of the movie, and it is Badalamenti’s score that drives the atmosphere and weight of the picture.

This sequel is the proper follow-up to the original.  Beyond just bringing back Nancy and her father, this just builds upon the original core ideas, and progresses them into a very exciting new place.  Nancy learned how to overcome Freddy in the first movie, but now, she teaches others how to fight him with their own set of strengths.  Some do parish, but others live to fight in another movie.  Wes Craven did early drafts of the script, and thus, had some creative input on this sequel.  Regardless of how much or little of his ideas made it there, I think his presence is still felt.  It is a smartly written film with a great cast of stellar young talents, and it still delivers on the scares and horror aspects.  Certainly none of the sequels measure up on a pure horror movie level to the original, but in terms of doing what a sequel should do, A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors does exactly that.  It expands the ideas and universe to have a fuller, more imaginative experience that entertains in new ways while still being respectful of where it came from.  This is an undeniable classic to franchise fans, and is certainly one of the most well loved slashers of all time.


A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985)

Nightmare on Elm Street 2Horror film sequel subtitles are never all that clever, but it’s odd that this is called Freddy’s Revenge considering these are all brand new characters that Freddy has no past history with to seek revenge against.  Nor is there any theme or hint at a revenge ideal here.  That aside, this is a peculiar film in this franchise.  As is no surprise, it was a rushed production since the first film was so financially successful for New Line Cinema.  So, it really does lack all of the brilliance of Wes Craven’s film, but what makes it peculiar is a certain subtext that many are aware of by now.  There are certainly detrimental qualities to this first sequel, but it’s not a terrible movie.  Still, that doesn’t mean it’s particularly good or memorable.

Five years have passed since Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) was sent howling back to hell.  But now, Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton), a new kid on Elm Street, is being haunted every night by gruesome visions of the deadly dream stalker.  And if his twisted soul takes possession of the boy’s body, Freddy will return from the dead to wreak bloody murder and mayhem upon the entire town.

The subtext in question is a rather obvious homoerotic subtext.  It has been talked about at great length, and so, it’s nothing new I’m bringing up here.  The 1980’s did have this bizarre homoerotic sensibility in the air, but this film, if any at all, seemed to have galvanized that all into a single 87 minute runtime.  Screenwriter David Chaskin did write all of this into the script, but apparently, none were aware of it while making the film.  There’s the constant bare-chested, sweaty scenes of Jesse every few minutes, there’s the S&M bondage club, the gym teacher getting stripped bare by Freddy, and the all too close relationship between Jesse and Grady.  You’ve got, yet again, a bare-chested Jesse barging into Grady’s bedroom where he is asleep and mostly undressed to talk about Jesse’s sexual inabilities with Lisa.  It is very obvious like a punch in the face, and that’s just the start of it.  Jesse’s struggle with Freddy is supposedly a struggle with his own repressed sexuality.  I will say it comes across loud and clear, but that’s not at all what Freddy is meant to be about.  He’s not the manifestation of anything except your own fears, and this film doesn’t deal with that aspect of Krueger at all, ever.

I sort of like the idea of Freddy using someone else as a conduit into our reality.  This is revisited in another way in The Dream Child and Freddy’s Dead, but it also doesn’t make a lot of sense for Freddy to transcend into our reality since he is essentially powerless outside of the dream world.  The problem here is that Freddy kills no one in the dream world, and instead, goes after them in a slightly surreal waking world.  Bringing Freddy into our reality, fully, feels wrong.  The scene where he finally does this was so ridiculous to director Jack Sholder that he couldn’t direct it himself because of how hard he was laughing during it.  The scene is not really scary at all, and is more silly than anything.  Freddy just running around and randomly terrorizing teenagers at a pool party even sounds wrong in concept, and doesn’t work in execution either.  Ideas like this are a big reason why Wes Craven stayed far away from this movie.

Even then, the kills are very forgettable and stock.  One guy gets whipped to death, and another gets stabbed with Freddy’s razor glove.  The rest are just slashed as the party.  This grossly pales in comparison to the brilliantly imaginative kills in Wes Craven’s original.  The innovative effects work created a darkly fantastical atmosphere of nightmarish deaths.  That showed Freddy’s power and enhanced his menace.  This film leans entirely on Freddy taking over Jesse as its sole hook of gruesome fantastical captivation, and it’s not remotely enough.  There are a few nightmares, but there is not really any haunting or chilling imagery to crawl up under your skin.

What you absolutely have to credit this film with is holding true to the presentation of Freddy even if the concepts behind him are altered.  Knowing how jokey and cheesy he became, it’s refreshing to see that this sequel didn’t start that trend.  He’s still masked in shadows, and his voice still has that low, salacious quality.  He feels concretely scary, and Robert Englund still puts his all into it.  This is the most highly admirable aspect of this movie, and becomes more apparent in retrospect looking at the franchise overall.  I just wish Englund had a better movie to complement that performance.

What make-up effects we do get are still great here.  The best evidence of this is when Freddy crawls and tears his way out of Jesse in gruesome, frightening fashion.  It is so excellently done.  Also, the make-up on Freddy himself is still fantastic.  Even in full light, it never appears cheap or rubbery like it would in later sequels.  It’s all very admirable work that doesn’t slack off anywhere, and while there’s not much use of visual effects, they are of a comparable quality.  I just wish there was a greater need for them to realize a more fiery imagination to rival the first movie.

The characters here are a divided issue for me.  I do feel that Mark Patton does a fine job as Jesse.  He’s fairly well written making him vulnerable and relatable.  He’s definitely the kind of teenager that doesn’t quite fit in, and is easily picked on.  Jesse has definite internal conflicts, but for a horror movie protagonist, he is terribly weak.  He is both the intended hero and the main victim.  That makes him difficult to invest yourself in because he is the furthest thing from a heroic figure.  He is not strong willed at all, and essentially, is the polar opposite of Nancy Thompson.  He’s not introverted like Tommy Jarvis in Friday the 13th, Part V, but it’s almost as bad having a main character who is nothing but troubled and full of angst when we’re looking for an inspiring hero.  The fact that Jesse is absent from the third act, and it is his girlfriend who releases him from Freddy’s control shows how out of whack the concept here is.  There’s really no one here to connect with as a hero or heroine.

Now, no one among this cast is really a poor actor, but the characters don’t really pop out at you.  They are fine, but they don’t have that special quality of personality and chemistry to really come to vibrant life.  Kim Myers is a potentially decent romantic interest, but despite a few moments of affection, she hardly feels like Jesse’s girlfriend and more like the best friend.  There’s no hot spark between Patton and Myers to sell this the way it’s supposed to be by the time they’re making out at the party.  The rest of the cast is essentially forgettable.  They’re not bad performances, but it all does just feel flat and disposable all on its own.  These just aren’t especially entertaining characters to spend time with.

The film deals with Jesse’s psychological elements very well.  Mark Patton does put in a solid effort selling the terror and torment that Freddy puts him through.  If this film kept true to Wes Craven’s ideas, I think it could have been a more effective and creatively satisfying movie.  Making the struggle psychologically based could be very intriguing instead of a physical or ideological battle.  Patton clearly showed he had the talent for the role, but even then, as I said, he’s never put into a position of strength to become our hero.  He never really fights back, and is constantly running away from every confrontation with Krueger.  Even at the film’s end, he’s still afraid and prone to Freddy screwing with him again.

Freddy’s Revenge is not a bad movie, and there are far, far worse entries in this franchise.  However, it really is a misconceived sequel taking things in the wrong direction.  It takes Freddy out of the dream world so much that you remove so much o the appeal of the original.  All of the dream-like qualities are downplayed with only a few nightmarish images, and extremely few actually occur when someone’s asleep.  The dream world is Freddy’s domain where he holds the power, and you want to see someone go into that world and battle Krueger on his own ground at his own game.  This is Fred Krueger royally screwing with the film’s lead character, and turning him into his own puppet.  That’s not very appealing.  It’s just an example of rushing a film into production with talents that didn’t have much reverence for Craven’s material or ideas.  It’s also not very pleasing that Christopher Young’s score does not include a single appearance of Charles Bernstein’s Elm Street theme, and is rather forgettable.  Even if this was its own standalone movie, and not a sequel to a horror classic, I don’t think this would be regarded as very good, regardless.


Freddy vs. Jason (2003)

Retrospect can bring clarity.  You see, back in 2003, I had never been more excited for the release of a movie than Freddy vs. Jason.  I could barely get to sleep the night before its opening.  I saw it twice on opening day and a third time later that weekend.  It was a massive experience for me, and I was even in contact with an executive at New Line Cinema while running Forever Horror at the time.  Posters, soundtracks, magazines, and the novelization quickly came into my possession because I was so enthusiastic and in love with this movie.  It was a monumental moment in time.  That was a long time ago, and even a few years after the film’s release I realized what this film truly was – a major disappointment.  The hype is dead and buried, the anticipation is a vague memory.  What I see and know now is that Freddy vs. Jason was a monument of missed opportunities due to a poor script “clean up” by David Goyer and the over-the-top comic book stylings of director Ronny Yu.  This film was barely what it should have been, and did not portray Jason to his fullest potential.

Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) is in hell, and can’t get out.  Everyone has forgotten about him, he has no power over anyone in the dream world.  He’s searched throughout hell for someone that could help him reignite people’s fear of Freddy, and he has in Jason Voorhees (Ken Kirzinger).  Freddy, posing as Jason’s mother Pamela Voorhees (Paula Shaw), manipulates Jason into reawakening and doing Freddy’s dirty work for a time.  Jason goes to Elm Street in Springwood, Ohio to lay the seeds of fear that will re-empower Freddy, but when Jason becomes uncontrollable and continues to take Freddy’s thunder and victims – the two immediately come at odds and the battle for 80s horror icon supremacy begins.

To be plainly straight forward, Ronny Yu does nothing with this film to make it remotely resemble anything horror-related.  While we have monsters and gore and murder, he doesn’t even try to make anything scary.  He just turns this entire concept into a comic book adventure with larger than life action like a Michael Bay film.  It’s all ridiculously overblown action with absolutely no attempt at building tension or suspense.  Ronny Yu didn’t care to take these characters back to their truly horror-driven roots.  In fact, he demonstrates very little to zero knowledge of the characters at all.  Ken Kirzinger’s performance is forced by Yu to be a slow lumbering Frankenstein’s Monster at times, and then, as an animalistic enraged killer.  Kirzinger does the best he can, but Yu forced him into a very specific, narrow portrayal of Jason that does not display the character at his best.  Ken was Kane Hodder’s stunt double in Friday The 13th Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan, and so, he knows how to do Jason justice (even if it is Kane Hodder’s version).  Ronny Yu simply knew nothing about the best aspects of Jason’s character, about what worked best in previous interpretations – let alone display Jason’s creative diversity with different weapons.  He may look like Jason Voorhees, but there is little here that resembles the character fans have come to enjoy.  I also severely hate the comical context Jason is thrown into repeatedly throughout the film.

Robert Englund, on the other hand, is allowed to put in possibly the best performance as Freddy Krueger since the original A Nightmare On Elm Street.  Freddy is sick, sadistic, and just totally vile here.  Unfortunately, the wisecracks and one-liners still do pop up to form some very cringe inducing moments.  It seems as if the lame humor aspects of the character will never die, but compared to the portrayal in Freddy’s Dead – this is evil incarnate.  When Englund’s in the moment of the most terrible acts, he delivers something we’ve hungered for way too long – pure, serious villainy.  Freddy may have been given only one kill in this film, but it truly is memorable.  The entire sequence is vintage Elm Street.  The slur in Krueger’s voice is new, but it also adds a touch of sickening evil.  Overall, Freddy is given a far better treatment here than Jason.  I believe that’s mainly because New Line was still the ‘House That Freddy Built,’ and he was their icon.  There’s nobody on board this production that was just as devoted to Jason as others were to Freddy.  I can surely hear the cries for “Kane Hodder,” but he had some ego issues with the role that did not serve him well in the aftermath of his departure.  He certainly had great reason to be upset for being canned from the film, but at some point, you have to be a professional and let it go.

The weakness of this film lies with Ronny Yu and the script.  Screenwriters Mark Shannon & Damian Swift reportedly had a lot more Jason-centric elements in the story, but David Goyer came in, eliminated many good things about it, cheesed up the dialogue, and ultimately made it a worse script overall.  When I saw Blade: Trinity, I saw how bad Goyer’s screenwriting could be when there’s no one to fine-tune it.  The guy isn’t as great of a scriptwriter as we’ve been led to believe.  The level of cheesy, horribly poor dialogue is out-right obscene.  It is cringe inducing to sit through it.  Still, a really good actor can make bad dialogue workable, even tolerable, but the cast we have here was a long way off from winning any awards beyond a Razzie.  Jason Ritter is stiff, boring, and shallow.  Monica Keena has a very ample upper body that’s used to laughable ends, but she displays no decent acting skills whatsoever.  Also, don’t get me start on Kelly Rowland – terrible, horrible, a pure crime against cinema.  It’s acting like this that could make great and proud B-movie actors like Bruce Campbell or Jeffrey Combs ashamed to be associated with the genre.  Although, there are some good efforts here, but unfortunately, they’re gone all too early.  These performances come from Brendan Fletcher as Mark Davis and Zack Ward as Mark’s long-dead brother Bobby.  Freddy uses Bobby to haunt and torture Mark to creepy effect, and Ward does a fine job mimicking Englund’s mannerisms.  Fletcher does very well despite having the burden of tackling most of the exposition in the film.  His character is smarter than all the other teenagers combined, as is Fletcher’s acting talent.  Too bad he’s disposed of once all his exposition dialogue has been delivered.  Lochlyn Munro clocks in as Officer Stubbs, and while his character seems to have some bit of potential, at least in story development, it’s dashed halfway through the film when he’s made into another statistic on the body count list.  That’s the failing of the characters in this film – if you have exposition dialogue in this film, you’re going to die right after you’ve served that purpose.  If you have nothing at all to contribute to the film in character, story, or acting talent, you’ll survive to the final act.

The effects in this movie are decent, but there’s way too much CGI employed.  Visual effects have always been a major element in the Nightmare films, but this is more than enough and too cheesy.  The volume of blood here makes everything very silly and hardly scary.  Also, the fact that Freddy has always had green blood in all previous film entries, and he now has regular red blood shows how little anyone cared for continuity.  Plus, Jason is undead – he has no blood pumping through his veins, yet it all spurts out like geysers.  Ever since undead Jason debuted in Jason Lives, his blood has been a black, gooey substance that oozes out of his wounds, when he did bleed.  The design of Jason is different, and while I like the hockey mask, it becomes too battered by the end ruining the visualization of Jason’s moral blankness that it’s meant to symbolize.  The raggedy clothing he’s draped in makes him look like a homeless derelict.  Why they couldn’t stick with the coveralls or the classic green shirt and tan khakis is beyond me.  He really does look like Frankenstein’s Monster in this film, minus the neck bolts.

Also, the level of comedy here is just wrong.  Even when Freddy is beating down on Jason in the dream world boiler room, it’s all done comically.  Jason’s just hurled around like in a pinball machine complete with sound effects and wisecracks.  I just hate that they couldn’t keep Freddy as a sick, detestable bastard, but instead were so tempted to make a wisecracking “fun” villain.  Freddy Krueger is setup from the very first moment of this movie as a child killer and possibly something even more sickening, but not long after, he’s being played up as a jokey villain.  This doesn’t jibe with me.  Certainly, nothing should be taken too seriously with a film that pits a wisecracking dream demon against an undead killer wearing a hockey mask, but there are certain character traits that should be weighed in when dealing with the character overall.  As a human being, Freddy Krueger kidnapped, violated, and killed children – not a laughing matter at all.  Of course, if anyone had made any attempt to make the majority of the teenage characters in this film any bit real, let alone sympathetic, Freddy would seem more villainous by attempting to kill them all.  Beyond just the portrayal of Freddy, the quality of the comedy is horribly cheap and childish.  It’s just badly written puns that add to the pile of garbage dialogue that this film dumps upon us.  The fact that they blatantly ripped-off the character of Jay from Jay & Silent Bob in the form of Freeberg just shows the laziness of the writing and casting.  While stoners have been a slasher mainstay, I cannot condone them carbon copying a character from a comedy franchise for a few weak, cheap laughs.  It’s a blatant sign of being creatively bankrupt or simply lazy.

The score created by Graeme Revell is grossly disappointing.  It sounds like he composed the thing during a ten minute coffee break in between films.  The same weak musical cues are used a dozen times over, and no real thought out themes exist here.  There was only one Jason “vocal effect” produced for the film, and any bit of Charles Bernstein’s Elm Street theme that appears in the soundtrack was injected in the aftermath of Revell’s scoring.  Knowing that Revell did the brilliant, beautiful, and very gothic score for The Crow made me hopeful that he’d deliver something equally as epic, but sadly, he phones this work in.  I would’ve preferred someone along the lines of Christopher Young scoring this as he did amazing work on the first two Hellraiser films and subsequent motion picture scores.  Regardless, whatever I had hoped for, this score is the most disappointing of either series.  Revell wasn’t even trying here.

The only good part of the film is the end when Freddy and Jason finally battle in the real world, but I’m only speaking of when they get hands-on.  Only when the two are chopping and tearing away at each other – ripping chunks of flesh from their bodies – does it get really damn good.  Everything previous to that is either a ridiculous WWE style brawl with flying elbows and such, or Freddy hurling heavy objects at Jason.  The real meat of the entire encounter is Freddy and Jason dropping the bullshit creativity, and just ripping each other apart!  This doesn’t last long enough, though, and it takes a third party to really allow for a winner of any kind to prevail, despite no one actually winning at all.

Again, another failing of this film is abandoning any sense of horror or suspense.  It’s just a monster movie meant to splatter blood across the screen, and that just doesn’t hold my interest.  There are a few frightening moments and a slew of excellent kills, but a little less time spent over indulging in comical farce and more time spent building up atmosphere and tension could’ve gone an exceptionally long way.  There are also numerous missed opportunities.  There could’ve been a great story with characters from both franchises coming together to deal with Freddy and Jason.  Shannon and Swift had mentions of Tommy Jarvis in the script, but he did not appear.  I think bringing together Tommy and maybe Alice from Dream Master and The Dream Child could’ve made a blockbuster combination.  In the least, we would’ve had a lead cast that could actually act.

On my horror movie website Forever Horror, I had an ever-growing article on the history of Freddy vs. Jason from the beginning of both franchises past the point of this film’s theatrical release.  It’s an insanely long article due to how long the film was in development.  It had been trying to get made since 1987, and for all the stacks of scripts, screenwriters, and directors that were attached to this film over those many long years, I cannot believe this is the best script New Line Cinema could come up with.  I cannot believe that Ronny Yu was the best director they could find to helm this.  There must’ve been a half dozen or more horror filmmakers out there craving to do this project that would’ve done an extremely better job with it.  Again, Yu essentially knew next to nothing about either character or franchise, and it just shocks me that New Line Cinema would hand this film over to someone like that.  I can understand wanting to avoid hiring someone with a bias towards Freddy or Jason, but the film still turned out more like A Nightmare on Elm Street sequel guest starring Jason.

I will admit that Friday The 13th is my favorite slasher film series, but even from an objective point of view, it’s easy to see the lack of Jason-centric elements here.  Crystal Lake doesn’t show up until the third act, and there’s a gross lack of creativity in Jason’s weapons and most of his kills.  Practically having that machete glued to his hand the whole film again displays the shallow knowledge the filmmakers had for Jason.  Also, claiming that Jason has some subconscious fear of water is preposterous.  We’ve seen Jason submerged in water numerous times in multiple films without so much as hesitating to do so.  He walked underwater halfway from Crystal Lake to Manhattan without a problem.  Also, regardless of the tone of the Friday The 13th movie, Jason was always portrayed as entirely serious and lethal, but this film pokes too much fun at him.  It puts him into comical moments that could’ve been reworked to be suspenseful.  It’s horrible direction and campy screenwriting like this which also turned Alien vs. Predator into such an abomination.  Both of these films could’ve had so much potential to be absolutely grisly, frightening, and intense films, but bad directors and screenwriters with no sense of respect for the material destroyed those hopes.  While AVP is undeniably the worst of the two, Freddy vs. Jason demonstrated you could get away with showing only little to no respect for the source material, and still be greatly successful at the box office.

What more can I even say about this in a summation?  The movie hit like a wild fire, but all that excitement and praise was just hype.  Today, I don’t buy into hype.  Either the film looks good or it doesn’t, and if it doesn’t deliver on my more matured tastes, no amount of hype is going to overshadow that.  There are films I can admit are bad, but still gain some degree of enjoyment from it.  While Freddy vs. Jason is a more tolerable film than Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare or Jason X, I have not had the genuine urge to watch it in many years.  This is not a film to vehemently avoid, but it is one where your expectations need to be drastically lowered to avoid severe disappointment.  If for nothing else, the horrible, vacuous acting is something you need to brace yourself for because it will make you cringe.  Overall, this movie was a gimmick, plain and simple.  It wasn’t about being faithful to the characters, fans, continuity, or franchises.  It wasn’t about good acting, directing, scoring, or scriptwriting either.  It’s strange that a film built out of the idea of fan service really has little to offer the fans that know the franchises the best.  It’s even worse that after this film was such a huge success, New Line Cinema decided to inflict the curse of the remake upon both Freddy and Jason.  So sad.


New Nightmare (1994)

After the horrendous Freddy’s Dead, New Line Cinema was willing to entertain ideas from series creator Wes Craven on a new entry to the A Nightmare on Elm Street franchise.  This film is partly a return to form for the series, but also ventures into a completely and radically new direction.  The entire film is set outside the realm of the franchise in our reality.  Many of the main characters and cameos are people playing themselves, to a degree.  Heather Langenkamp, the heroine from the first and third films in the series, plays herself.  We also have appearances by Wes Craven, John Saxon, and Robert Shaye – all playing themselves with some creative licenses.  Robert Englund is of course here, playing both a more eccentric version of himself and the demonic incarnation of Freddy Krueger.

Heather Langenkamp lives a content life with her husband Chase Porter (David Newsom) and son Dylan (Miko Hughes).  However, her sense of safety is compromised by a series of unsettling phone calls which Heather believes are from an anonymous stalker.  Coupled with this is some increasingly strange behavior from Dylan.  Heather gains little comfort from her former co-stars Robert Englund or John Saxon about either her paranoia or concern for her son.  While she does not allow her son to watch any of the A Nightmare on Elm Street films, with her promoting the ten year anniversary of the original, she cannot escape its looming shadow.  She soon finds out that Wes Craven is planning on making the definitive Nightmare movie, and that he has been plagued by nightmares of his own.  It has practically become an epidemic as the same disturbing dreams have come to Heather as well as Robert Englund himself.  Craven eventually tells Heather that what is haunting them is an ancient demon that has been roaming from story-to-story since the beginning of time, but has come accustomed to Freddy.  Now, it wants into our world, and Heather is the perceived gatekeeper betweens the realms of fantasy and reality since she was the first to defeat Freddy.  Dylan is a key focal point of this demon’s plan to lure in Heather.  As all the elements begin to converge, the world around Heather starts to transform into the twisted existence of this guised Freddy Krueger.

New Nightmare is a creatively successful film that was not a financial success in 1994.  I don’t think New Line Cinema knew quite how to market this concept in a way that was concise to an audience.  It’s a far more cerebral concept than had been introduced into the series prior, but even then, it still requires a good amount of exposition to get a handle on.  It’s very strange that at the time of release I had never even watched any of these films, and hadn’t spawned my horror movie fandom, yet.  Still, I was entirely aware of this film while no one else seemed to be.  Thankfully, time has given it the respect and admiration it deserved.

Wes Craven absolutely wrote an ambitious and smart screenplay.  I think this shows a maturing of his artistic sensibilities.  This is very high concept employing ideas that could not be competently handled by just anyone.  There have been plenty of poorly conceived and/or executed reality-bending films, but only a special few that have done it with inspiring results.  While that’s mostly true of any genre, this is one that doesn’t have as high of an output, and is usually only tried when a filmmaker feels ambitious.  Most fail because they don’t have the right intellect behind them to pull it off without becoming pretentious, contrived, or fall into a style over substance trap.  The films that do succeed have visionary filmmakers behind them who know how to convey the concept smartly and effectively.  In New Nightmare’s case, it connects you directly with the characters, and invests you in their plights while methodically building up its premise with fine dashes of foreboding tension and suspense.  It treats its horror and gruesome deaths with real human emotion and grief.  These are real people experiencing real terror and pain.  Thus, it increases the dread and danger of their situation with a heavy weight that an audience can truly feel.

This film is exceptionally solid while it’s not so much slasher horror as supernatural, psychological horror.  Craven relies more on subtle atmosphere and a series of creepy, unexplained events, much like a haunted house story, to scare an audience.  There is some gore, but it is only in a few scenes.  So, on a slasher film level, New Nightmare does feel very starved for gruesome bloodletting, and that does detract from the film for me.  There’s not enough visceral pay-off for the building up of suspense and atmosphere.  Heather is truly terrorized by what this demon does to her life, tormenting her at every turn, and claiming the lives of a few people closest to her as well as traumatically manipulating her son.  Those elements are executed outstandingly well.  You can feel her fear and frayed psychological state increase throughout the movie.  Freddy has very restrained screentime, which is a pleasant change from his overexposure in previous sequels.  Wes Craven instead uses the screentime to intelligently and clearly setup the reality transcending premise before unveiling the revamped Freddy Krueger.

This ancient demon has decked Freddy out in a generous use of leather, and a frightening new glove of razors.  It’s no longer rusted, but very shiny and skeleton like showing off Krueger’s burned hand.  The new make-up design is certainly fresh, but still looks like prosthetics instead of an organic piece of burned flesh.  It’s certainly better than the very rubbery appearance we got in the last few films, but I’ve still seen better burned flesh effects elsewhere.  Generally, the redesign does give the character a darker edge which supports the premise of the film, and that this is not actually Freddy but a demon taking on his appearance and persona.

All the actors are as great as could be imagined.  Langenkamp is even more beautiful here than ever before, and her performance is very true to the situation, despite its fantastical nature.  I refer mostly in regards to the parent-child relationship, and how she does whatever is necessary to protect her child.  Now, while this film blurs the line between reality and fantasy, this applies to the presentation of the people.  Much of the stalking elements in the story were taken from the real Heather Langenkamp’s own experiences with a stalker, and so, there’s a personal element to this story for her.  Overall, she brings a great weight of maturity and strong emotion to a role that was likely challenging for her to grasp.  It was bold and brave of her to put as much of her personal life on screen like this as she did, and if it wasn’t Wes Craven asking her to do so, I don’t think she would have done it.  On a related note, Miko Hughes shows a wealth of talent, and is really endearing.  Most kids in horror films tend to be annoying or worse, but he managed to be very likable and endearing.

Robert Englund, as always, clocks in with all he has.  This time, his Freddy performance is intimidating and fearsome.  There’s not a wisecrack to be had, and he still remains engaging as a dark villain.  His screentime is quite limited until the final act of the film, but enough is done throughout the picture to increase his menace and power.  I know for a fact that Englund did prefer portraying Freddy as darker, but most directors preferred the comical approach.  Thankfully, Craven brought the character back to where he works best, and Englund did a great job there.

John Saxon also returns in a supporting role, and I’ve always had a fondness for him.  He’s just such a captivating and marvelous actor with a very fatherly or commanding aura about him.  He always inspires confidence, and consistently does solid work.  I thoroughly enjoy every bit of work I have seen of him.  Tracy Middendorf stars as Julie, Dylan’s babysitter, and really comes off as sweet and caring.  She’s definitely the ideal babysitter.  I could easily go on and on about the cameos and solid acting, but to sum it up, the acting in this movie is wholly satisfying and exceedingly far above slasher genre standards, as is everything with New Nightmare.

This is definitely one of Wes Craven’s best and most modern looking films.  Director of Photography Mark Irwin gave the film a lot of visual integrity, firmly grounding it in a dramatic reality.  There’s a nice use of blue tones that add to the atmosphere that Craven nicely crafted.  This looks like a serious, intelligent film for a more mature audience, contrasting the more juvenile sensibilities of previous Elm Street sequels.  Mark Irwin really showed a great ability to artistically shoot a suspenseful film, and it’s great that Wes Craven used him again on Scream.  It’s only a shame that most of Irwin’s filmography after this were comedies, many of them rather stupid comedies.

The story behind the inception of New Nightmare is also interesting.  The concept was spawned from a meeting between Wes Craven and New Line executive Robert Shaye.  He wanted to know, from Wes, what he thought was done wrong with the series, and if the company had offended Wes in anyway.  Craven made a number of valid points about Freddy becoming a comical buffoon, and Bob offered Wes the chance to rectify these errors.  I’ve always liked that cordial mentality from Mr. Shaye who never cared for burning bridges, only building a better company built on professional integrity and respect.  With that, New Nightmare came into being.

Even without comparison to the wreckage that was Freddy’s Dead, this film shines and soars high as one of the best of the series right behind the original film.  The only major drawback of the film, I feel, is that this demon-as-Freddy is not dispatched in a very clever way.  There’s really no fantastical element to it, as one would expect from such a fantastical concept.  It is more of a physical method of defeating him instead of a supernatural, metaphysical, or psychological one.  And even though I’ve never taken much note of J. Peter Robinson’s score, it is widely recognized as one of the best horror film scores around.  Ultimately, this is still one to highly recommend alongside the 1984 original and A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors.  Those are the definitive classics of the franchise, and those reputations are rightly earned.


A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

You didn’t think I could let Forever Horror Month go by without a look at old Fred Krueger, did you?  I think A Nightmare on Elm Street came out at just the right time.  The slasher film craze had exploded, but then, began to water itself down with all the imitators.  There were still good ones out there, but it was already time for something fresh to shake up the genre.  Something to bring it back to a terrifying and original concept that was conceived by a master in Wes Craven.  Where the effectiveness of some other horror films have diminished over time for me. A Nightmare on Elm Street still holds a chilling nerve in my spine.

In the town of Springwood, on Elm Street, Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) and her friends are experiencing violent nightmares where they are stalked by a badly scarred man with a clawed glove of razors.  When Nancy’s friend Tina (Amanda Wyss) is brutally murdered in bed one night, Nancy believes that it wasn’t Tina’s boyfriend who killed her, but the man who terrorizes their dreams – Fred Krueger (Robert Englund).  Unfortunately, her claims are dismiss by her father, Police Lieutenant Donald Thompson (John Saxon), and her alcoholic mother (Ronee Blakley).  So, Nancy, aided by her boyfriend Glenn (Johnny Depp), Nancy fights to stay awake to discover the truth behind Krueger, and find a way to stop him for good or never sleep again.

Right from the start, the film sets a dark, gritty, frightening tone with Freddy’s construction of his bladed glove.  This film truly is a nightmare come to life with the shadowy boiler room being the perfect backdrop for Krueger.  It’s damp, steamy, and filthy – a dangerous industrial environment for a sleazy, twisted killer.  From there, the film haunts you with creepy, surreal images that touch your deepest fears.  Once you are in Freddy’s realm there is no safe harbor.  He wants you to know you’re trapped and ensnared in his sick, demented reality.  He’s the master of the domain that is your dreams, and that’s what’s most frightening of all.  He can violate you deep within your mind, and no matter how hard you try, you can’t go forever without sleep.  Eventually, you are going to fall asleep, and that’s all he needs to have his way with you.  Unlike other slashers, Freddy doesn’t just stalk and kill.  He gains vast pleasure by psychologically tormenting his victims so that when he finally goes in for the kill, it will be all the more sweeter for him.  Freddy is a glorious sadist.  He both literally and figuratively feeds off your fear.  It’s what gives him his power and pleasure.  The glove was also a brilliant idea by Wes Craven.  Most slashers just kill with whatever’s handy, but Freddy puts his own signature mark on his victims with a weapon custom built for himself.  It’s a direct and distinct extension of his twisted personality.

Robert Englund instantly created an icon here built off of Wes Craven’s imagination.  He absorbed himself into the weight and feel of this character through the amazing make-up effects, and the dingy, distinct wardrobe.  The body language alone conveys a sickening individual who takes perverse pleasure in everything he does.  Every little gesture with the blades, every wiggling of the tongue, every slinking movement creates a terrifying performance that burns itself into your psyche.  The fact that Craven keeps Krueger so secluded in shadow, and only highlights certain aspects of his figure or face, enhances the intimidating power of him.  This is the most vile rendition of Fred Krueger we have ever gotten, and I think it’s a real disservice to horror audiences that he became so campy and cheesy in the later sequels.  I know Englund preferred going the darker route, but most directors preferred the comical punch.  I cannot fathom why because Freddy proves to be his most frightening in his purest form.

Beyond just Robert Englund, the film is packed with a great cast.  Heather Langenkamp steps into a strong lead role as Nancy.  I love that the film sets up Tina as the potential protagonist, but swerves the audience when gruesome tragedy strikes.  This allows Nancy to overcome her own grief and build herself up to a confident, smart heroine.  Yet, she never loses her honest sense of compassionate emotion.  Nancy does feel fear, very intensely, but she fights to conquer it every step of the way.  Langenkamp looked and felt like a genuine fresh faced girl next door which made her performance vulnerable and realistic.  The strength she brought to Nancy was incredible making an audience believe in Nancy through every terrifying moment.

Johnny Depp, in his very first acting role, is also great showing off the charm and talent we’ve come to know from him.  As Glenn, he’s funny and sweet.  I also believe casting John Saxon is always a rock solid choice.  He brings a fatherly warmth to Donald Thompson showing concern for his beloved daughter.  He’s also entirely believable as a commanding police officer with a fine screen presence which just exudes strength and confidence.  Ronnie Blakley is quite remarkable as this drunken mother who is clearly unable to cope with the crime she helped commit.  Amanda Wyss puts in a great performance selling the intense fear of Tina, and showing the subtle terror that trembles underneath.  Overall, everyone in this cast does an immensely solid and greatly admirable job.  They make this a film filled with character you can genuinely cared about, and thus, seriously fear for.

Wes Craven shows such a talent for suspense here.  He carefully unnerves an audience with subtle sounds and glimpses of terror, firstly.  Then, when Freddy finally reveals himself, it’s a truly scary sight as he torments Tina with a grin and a despicable laugh.  Just as Freddy torments his victims, Craven uses those moments to freak out his audience to build up the suspense and tension.  He prolongs the fear with masterful skill so that the pay-off will be frightening beyond your imagination.  The kills are gruesomely brilliant with no lack of gore or blood.  The screen is soaked in crimson many times in the movie., and the violent impact of those four blades slicing into flesh is always terrifying and shocking.

All of the special effects in A Nightmare on Elm Street are absolutely impressive and truly ambitious.  Today, as the lackluster remake proved, a lot of these effects today would be done with severely unconvincing and unimpressive CGI.  Back in 1984, everything was done practically, and the results are just astonishingly excellent.  Even knowing how they did it takes away nothing from the viewing experience of the film.  The movie magic is still there, and it is still massively effective.  From Tina being dragged up the wall and ceiling of her bedroom to Freddy’s form pushing through the wall above Nancy as she sleeps to all the subtle tricks and slight of hand to achieve so much, these are timeless, classic images that are the result of talented, innovative minds.  They entirely sell the chillingly surreal qualities and power of Krueger.  It’s amazing that they achieve so much on a budget that was less than $2 million.  Compare that with the $35 million budget of the 2010 remake which couldn’t pull off the same effects with even a fraction of the artistic quality or effectiveness.

Charles Bernstein beautifully score this film with just the right approach.  The main theme is instantly recognizable with its sort of nursery rhyme melody, but has a haunting, foreboding quality lying behind it which is purely brilliant musicianship.  The score, in general, is purely enveloping with a wide, rich range using synthesizer in gorgeous fashion.  It disturbs and unsettles at nearly every dark turn.  The sound design works in tandem with the score by fully immersing an audience into Freddy’s world.  The sounds of the boiler room come to magnificent life in a full surround sound experience.  I think it’s one of the best audio presentations of any horror film I’ve ever heard.

Again, what really sets this film apart from its slasher brethren is the psychological aspect.  Freddy isn’t a killer you can simply outrun.  He’s lurking in the dark recesses of your dreams, waiting for you to fall into his clutches.  It’s amazing to me that Wes Craven is such a sweet, easy going, regular guy, but is able to delve so vividly into the chilling imagery and nature of nightmares.  Scary experiences from his childhood forged many of these inspirations, but so much touches a frightening nerve, such as the bloody corpse of Tina in the body bag beckoning to Nancy, that it demonstrates Craven’s creative brilliance.  He taps so deeply into the mechanics of horror, and is able to craft beautifully gruesome images that could dig their way into your own subconscious.  I think Craven is at his best when he’s pushing horror to a higher level beyond the visceral.  Whether it’s the psychological aspects of this franchise, or the mystery aspects of the Scream films, he has a unique quality to inject into horror films that I really enjoy.

A Nightmare on Elm Street is a horror classic that goes beyond just the slasher genre.  It was created by a team of greatly talented and dedicated individuals in front of and behind the camera.  No other film in the franchise quite matches up to the dark, pure horror quality of Wes Craven’s original.  While there are sequels with their own enjoyable and respected qualities, there are many which simply lost sight of what horror was, and diluted the powerful and effective tone of fear the franchise was built upon.  Regardless of disappointing sequels or poor remakes, the 1984 original will always stand as an eternal horror classic.


Prince of Darkness (1987)

Prince of Darkness is certainly one of John Carpenter’s stranger and more underappreciated films.  It’s the second installment in what Carpenter calls his “apocalypse trilogy” (which includes 1982’s The Thing and 1995’s In The Mouth of Madness).  Simply put, this film is about the coming of the apocalypse, and the arrival of the Prince of Darkness – Satan himself.  This is one seriously eerie and creepy film, but it has the slowest pace of any Carpenter film I have seen.  I believe this film comes as an acquired taste.  It can take multiple viewings to really enjoy it fully, as it did for me.

A group of scientists, students, and priests – led by Father Loomis (Donald Pleasance) and Professor Howard Birack (Victor Wong) – have come to study a mysterious canister which has been sealed away in the basement of a Los Angeles church.  The eerie green liquid inside this canister proves to be supernatural as it defies gravity, leaking upwards to the ceiling, and soon, it’s discovered that it is self-organizing as part of a living intelligence.  This has made way for changes to occur in nature that herald the coming of something evil.  And those who come into contact with this liquid are transformed into mindless undead slaves of Satan himself.  Outside the church, the homeless and derelicts of Los Angeles become powerless against the influence of hell.  The few human beings inside the church are trapped – barricading themselves inside with threats all around them.  Theories are abound as to what is happening and philosophies about heaven, hell, and all of creation.  But whatever forces are at work, these few people must not only survive these servants of hell, but also prevent the coming of the Prince of Darkness from the other side.

If you choose to watch this film, I suggest you get things as dark and as quite as possible, put in the DVD, get that surround sound just right, and get ready to experience one of the most haunting, frightening films ever.  This is possibly the most taut and suspenseful Carpenter film of all-time.  The master of terror gives us a film that nobody should easily be able to forget.  The score from John Carpenter & Alan Howarth is absolutely mesmerizing and powerful.  Right from the beginning, it sucks you into a creepy and absolutely ominous world, and doesn’t let go until the end credits have finished.  It’s an absorbing, killer work of musicianship that compliments the film marvelously.

The effects here are great.  There’s nothing here as complex as in The Thing (which Rob Bottin really delivered something groundbreaking), but there’s plenty of scary makeup work and visuals to unsettle any audience.  There’s such apocalyptic biblical imagery here – including swarms of creepy crawly critters – that it will have you squirming and jumping from your seat.  John Carpenter wrote the screenplay under the pseudonym “Martin Quartermass,” and man, he does just such an amazing job eliciting such haunting emotions.  The film has such a suspenseful power that it could ONLY come from John Carpenter.

That pseudonym is only one of several that Carpenter has employed in his career.  He uses them because he feels uncomfortable with his name plastered all over the credits as if it’s an egotistical thing to take so much credit.  Me, I believe in everyone getting the credit they deserve for the hard work they do.  The fact of the matter is that I know who Martin Quartermass, John T. Chance, and Frank Armitage are, and it is still John Carpenter’s Prince of Darkness.

The cast is full of Carpenter regulars such as Donald Pleaseance (Halloween, Escape From New York), Victor Wong & Dennis Dun (Big Trouble in Little China), and Peter Jason (They Live, In The Mouth of Madness).  Also, Jameson Parker from TV’s Simon & Simon is in a lead role as well.  It’s very much a Carpenter style cast in that he doesn’t cast big stars, but a lot of strong character actors that give the film a textured diversity.  I really enjoy all their talents, and they all put in fantastic efforts.  John Carpenter has always been great in the casting department (probably best displayed in The Thing).  We even get a cameo from shock-rocker Alice Cooper, and he contributes the title song from the album of the same name.  The song only appears in a small scene, and via a guy’s walkman radio.  In any case, it’s always nice to see Alice appear in a horror film via an acting role or as a musician.  He has no lines, but appears creepy enough as one of the derelict servants outside the church.  Overall, this cast gives a lot of life and character to this slow-paced film.

In a way, this is different from most Carpenter movies, mainly in pace.  He’s always made very smart pictures, and his horror has never been something you can entirely shut your brain off for.  And while Prince of Darkness is full of atmosphere that drives every horror element forward, it is much more an idea and philosophy driven screenplay.  There are very few action set pieces as the danger and horror are played through tense atmosphere and chilling visuals.  It’s a film that crawls in under your skin slowly, and requires you to stay mentally aware of what’s happening for it to have the proper effect.

There’s a good deal of discussion in the film about philosophies regarding dreams, death, hell, religion, and so forth.  This adds to the psychological aspect of the film since it revolves around such supernatural or paranormal phenomena birthed out of an ancient evil covered up by the church.  With the film having such a wide ensemble cast, they have plenty of room for differing opinions and beliefs, but don’t let this make you think the film gets bogged down by it.  Not at all.  As they uncover more truths, it enhances the fearful and foreboding atmosphere of the film.  There is a haunting evil taking form in their presence, and it is slowly consuming them either physically or psychologically.

In everyone’s dreams, they see a transmission from the future of a dark figure exiting the front of the church they are all holed up in.  They get only bits and pieces, but they all share it getting a little more each time they fall asleep.  It is another piece of the foreboding doom that lies ahead of them, and it is immensely effective.

Prince of Darkness definitely has similarities to an old style zombie film where a group of mismatched people have to fend for their lives against an undead army.  However, Carpenter just pushes it further with so much more substance and unsettling visuals.  This really is a nightmare come to life.  A constant theme in Carpenter’s Apocalypse Trilogy is some sort of force consuming humanity and deteriorating it into something entirely inhuman.  In The Thing, it’s an actual alien life form that perfectly duplicates any organism it infects which could eventually wipe out the human race.  With In The Mouth of Madness, reality is twisted and distorted to where people become psychotic and homicidal in the wake of ancient evil reclaiming our world.  In Prince of Darkness, it’s sort of a bridge between the concepts.  As an ancient evil slowly claws its way back into our world, it also consumes nature and humanity until they become entirely mindless, inhuman servants.  Coming from three different screenwriters on three different films, that is an entirely fascinating conceptual arc.

This film is undoubtedly one of John Carpenter’s finest works.  Some don’t take a good liking to it because of its slow, slow pace, and its focus more on suspense than physical intensity.  Whatever the case, I find it to be a masterwork worthy of inclusion to anyone’s DVD collection.  The cast is very good, fun at times, but solid always.  The score is pure gold, a powerful accomplishment for Carpenter and Alan Howarth.  As in any Carpenter film, the cinematography is stellar, and the direction is absolutely phenomenal!  If you genuinely want to get creeped out to the max one dark, lonely night – this is the one film to watch!  I won’t say that Prince of Darkness is a perfect film as the pace can be a detractor to its potential.  Part of good tension and suspense is momentum, and it’s not entirely consistent here.  However, it is a great flick, and I will give it a great 9 out of 10.  If nothing else, the ending will grab you like only a John Carpenter film can!