When 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.
So, over twenty years later Rick Rosenthal would return to the Halloween franchise for this entry. I honestly have never liked Halloween: H20 for a multitude of reasons, and I don’t wish to sit through it again to review it. Thus, I was so immensely glad that this film promptly retconned the ending of that movie, and allowed for Michael Myers to live again and not die like a punk. I know there are those who disagree with that feeling, but so be it. While I do find this sequel enjoyable to a degree, it does have valid issues to critique about it.
For the first broadcast of the new reality website Dangertainment, a group of college students are hired to explore the ruins of the house of infamous murderer Michael Myers. Six cash-strapped friends decide to explore the home, but what they don’t know is that Michael is on his way home back to Haddonfield after a fateful confrontation with his sister Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis). Now, being broadcast across the internet, these unsuspecting victims will fall prey to Myers’ methodical blade.
If this movie was made ten years later, it probably would have been a found footage horror movie. Very little would have to change to accommodate that approach, but thankfully, that’s not the case here. I can understand why this story idea was used. This is the eighth movie in this franchise, including Season of the Witch, and a studio is going to feel like they need a fresh gimmick to drive in audiences. Paramount felt the same thing when they made Jason Takes Manhattan. The problem is that these ideas are usually not all that favorable with audiences. I love slasher movies, but I do like someone doing something fresh with the formula every so often. Frankly, I think Halloween: Resurrection executes this idea as well as it can be. In fact, it has some strangely honest commentary on reality television. Dangertainment mocks up the entire Myers house with false clues about Michael’s upbringing because they know actual reality is boring. No one would watch a bunch of people wandering through an empty house. The head of the company, Freddie Harris, has to dress it up and create an illusion and sell it as reality so to make it entertaining. I like that the Freddie character does come around to denouncing that illusion and the using of Michael Myers as a sound bite to drive viewership up. It shows an effort on the part of the filmmakers to make something of the premise, which is indeed dated. Halloween: Resurrection might be far from the pinnacle of this franchise, but it’s far more consistent than the rushed mess of The Revenge of Michael Myers.
If you watched the trailer for this you might believe that Jamie Lee Curtis had a larger role in it than she really does. Her story is confined to the opening sequence at a psychiatric hospital where she has her final confrontation with Michael. A quick summation at the film’s start states that Michael Myers had switched outfits with a paramedic before the last film’s climax, and it was that poor soul with a crushed larynx that Laurie decapitated. What ensues in this opening sequence with Laurie and Michael puts the storyline to rest. I’m sure there are fans who did not like this at all, possibly as much as I hated the ending of H20, but taken on its own merits, it is a well done sequence that is to the point. Laurie doesn’t go out in a blaze of glory, but really, you shouldn’t set your expectations that high for this movie. It’s just not that ambitious.
I do really like the look of this sequel. It makes great use of atmospheric lighting. It has the polish of a major studio feature, but Rosenthal and his cinematographer just know how give it that shadowy, moody quality. True to the John Carpenter roots, there’s some very solid use of blues and fine steadicam work. The video camera footage of the internet broadcast is about what you’d expect in the pre-high definition digital era. We get more and more of it as the film progresses, and you could take it or leave it depending on your disposition towards it. It has some effectiveness in certain sparse moments for us to see things from the characters’ point of views, which is evocative of the found footage genre like The Blair Witch Project had already shown, but there’s nothing special to witness here in that regard.
The biggest highlight of this movie is that I absolutely LOVE the score by Danny Lux. I honestly believe it is the best score of the sequels. Lux adds a heavier punctuation to the familiar themes, and overall, he crafts a more haunting, partially gothic aura to the film. It’s a score that really soars far above the quality of the film it is attached to. Regardless of what you think of this movie, you should definitely give this score a standalone listen. It is immensely effective. Danny Lux does an amazing job with it.
Now, I don’t think this is a bad cast. For the most part, they do come off as fairly standard slasher film fodder, but this cast does seem like they are putting forth an honest effort. Each one tries to make their character enthusiastic, charismatic, and somewhat entertaining. There’s no real standout, but everyone essentially delivers a performance of a consistent, equal level. I wouldn’t say this new cast features anything approaching greatness, but it’s good for the expectations you would likely have.
Bianca Kajlich does well in making Sara a relatable and sympathetic lead. There’s very little to the character, same with everyone, but there’s enough of a decent, vulnerable person in her performance for it to work. She has this internet based relationship with the high school freshman Myles. Through that, they’ve built a foundation of trust and friendship, and it plays fairly well into the movie near the climax. Ryan Merriman is endearing as Myles. He’s definitely the audience’s conduit into having sympathy for the victims. He and his friends are at a Halloween party watching the online stream of the Myers house expedition, and witness the horror as it progresses with little to be able to do about it. Despite Myles and Sara being strictly internet pals, Merriman does a fine job creating an emotional connection between both characters. It’s almost a shame that the film never allows them to actually see each other face-to-face.
The role of Freddie Harris is indeed filled by Busta Rhymes. Clearly, he didn’t need to be in this movie, but I will give him credit that he doesn’t slack off. He portrays a role that’s within his ability as a charismatic salesman, but also does a fine job with the more fearful, regretful moments later in the film. We surely could have done without the Kung Fu fight against Michael, but at least the filmmakers did enough to set it up earlier on. In the fiery climax, he’s certainly played up for the sake of his fans, and it does feel rather out of place. You might as well have Arnold Schwarzenegger charge in there for as much as its played like an action hero moment. It would be essentially the same effect.
The role of The Shape is filled by Brad Loree who I feel does a decent job. It’s definitely Dick Warlock inspired, but not quite so rigid. His performance is simply okay. It doesn’t standout, the same as the rest of the cast, but it works fine for the demands of this film. Also, while he is listed as 6’2”, I think the baggy coveralls make him appear smaller in stature than he likely really is. The mask for his Michael Myers could have done with a little less airbrushing detail, but really, no sequel has really gotten the mask to look right compared to the original film. I’m not sure why that’s been so difficult.
The most important question, though, is if this film is scary. Well, it has the potential to be depending on how weathered of a horror fan you are. Rick Rosenthal really does a lot to set a strong visual atmosphere conducive to scaring an audience. There are plenty of spooky moments of Michael Myers lurking in the shadows, only seen in glimpses. It certainly has moments that could scare certain people, but generally speaking, it’s not going to do much for the seasoned horror fan. Especially ten years on, with the far more intense films we’ve gotten in this genre, regardless of your preference, Halloween: Resurrection is fairly tame. Even John Carpenter’s original is not really an effective horror film anymore to me, but I respect it immensely on every artistic level. It is, after all, the movie review of mine that launched Forever Cinematic in the first place.
The Halloween franchise is kind of a mess. There are a lot of subjective ups and downs depending on what storylines you enjoy. For me, I really liked where things were potentially going with the sixth film, The Curse of Michael Myers, mainly in its Producer’s Cut form, but so much tanked that potential resulting in Halloween: H20. I hated that film for killing the continuity and storyline that I loved, and intending to dispatch Michael Myers in an unimaginative, bullheaded fashion. This sequel ultimately feels like a weak whimper trying to extend the bankability of the franchise just a little further without enough ambition or unique talent to elevate it. It just tries to be a fun slasher flick, and if you take it as that, it’s fine. I can sit down and burn ninety minutes with it on a whim, but it’s entirely forgettable and dismissible. Aside from the potentially divisive opening with Laurie’s death, it really plays it safe with an either fun or lame premise. Essentially, you can take this film or leave it. If it’s on cable, and you’ve just time to kill, it’s a decent watch. I would like to give it a better recommendation, but knowing that there are a some far stronger films in this franchise, I can’t give it any further credit than this.
There has been one conspicuous omission from my reviews of the Halloween franchise, and it is this first sequel. The reason for this is, one, I have never really written a full review of it before, and secondly, I’ve never really cared for it at all. This stems from the fact that it has very little to offer me as either a fan of John Carpenter’s original or as a big slasher movie fan. Simply said, so much of it just doesn’t appeal to me. From the reworked score to the bland hospital environment to the clear shift from atmospheric horror to a reliance on gore, this isn’t the Halloween sequel that I want to see. Even the ones that are technically worse films, they have an entertainment value that I can indulge in on some level. There are many reasons why this film doesn’t even give me that much.
Picking up exactly where the first film left off, it seems the inhuman Michael Myers is still very much alive and out for more revenge as he stalks the deserted halls of the Haddonfield Memorial Hospital for Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis). As he gets closer to his main target, Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) discovers the chilling mystery behind the crazed psychopath’s actions
It might sound somewhat unfair, but the vast majority of my gripes with this film are in comparison to John Carpenter’s original. However, with the fact that this film picks up exactly where the first left off, it demands that comparison because it is trying to convince us that this is a seamless continuation of that movie. The problem is that it doesn’t feel seamless in many aspects, and they are largely on the technical side. Still, there are issues with the quality of the script, and just the effectiveness of Halloween II as a horror movie that I wish to address.
To be straight up honest, I do not like the score for this movie at all. Yes, they are the same themes with John Carpenter and Alan Howarth doing the score, but the overly saturated synthesizer sound has never been to my liking. It doesn’t sound like a horror movie score to me. It sounds silly and over bloated. The first film’s score felt far more subtle and artistically applied. To me, the score for Halloween II just evokes no sense of tension, suspense, or chilling atmosphere for me. There are many instances where a strategic use of score could have been utilized to craft great suspense and nerve-racking tension, but instead, it’s dead silent. This score relies more heavily on the musical stingers, and feels poorly implemented overall. Carpenter’s scores usually craft a brilliant soundscape for a unique auditory experience, but there seems to be a significant lack of score in the moments where it should flourish.
Now, this is a very well shot movie, done so again by acclaimed director of photography Dean Cundey. It has some very good lighting schemes in certain scenes, and the continued use of the Pana-glide camera work is excellent. Director Rick Rosenthal does make an effort to emulate John Carpenter’s visual style, but I have always felt that the color palette of Halloween II was never quite right when compared to the first film. The hospital interiors feature a terribly bland color scheme, as most hospitals do, and because of this, it doesn’t have any of the visual pop of the first movie. There are no daytime scenes to soak in that late autumn feeling as this is all set at night, and really, it feels like it could be any night of the year. The film also lacks the atmospheric blue tones that Cundey used in the original as well as several other films he’s shot. Also, when I look at this film in certain instances, the lighting just doesn’t look quite right. The feeling, the mood, the balance of light and dark, at times, doesn’t feel consistent with the first film. This is especially evident when new footage is spliced into the revisited footage from the ending of Halloween. It’s not even knowing that it is new footage married with old footage. Back to the Future, Part II did this sort of thing seamlessly, and was also shot by Dean Cundey. These issues, I think, also stem from the fact that the first movie was a late 1970’s independently produced film while this is an early 1980’s studio produced sequel. It is inevitably going to have a slightly different visual feel due to extra money, studio mandates, a shift in filmmaking aesthetics, and a change of directors.
Even then, Rick Rosenthal’s film was tampered with by the studio and Carpenter as they felt it was too tame in comparison to other recent slasher films. While I can see the clear evidence of that since there is a definite lack of suspense, although much of that is, again, due to the absence of a score in key scenes, this is a sequel that didn’t stay true to its predecessor. Yes, of course, this is a slasher film that is going to follow many of the tropes of the genre which were originated in Halloween. However, this sequel feels like it’s trying to fit in with the Friday The 13th style slasher film craze instead of staying true to the Halloween style slasher. The genre exploded after the success of Friday The 13th, and it became very indulgent in gore and sexuality. It essentially became exploitative in that regard, and this film embraced that mentality whereas Halloween was a film built entirely on suspense and atmosphere. There is some suspense here, but it is especially sparse. Instead of holding to what made Halloween successful and effective in the first place, Halloween II tries to conform to what was popular at the time, and thus, feels second rate to me. Rick Rosenthal tries to match Carpenter’s style in many regards, but then, Carpenter comes in and tries to veer it away from what he originally did. It’s certainly not a film that is one director’s vision, and even then, Rosenthal isn’t given much to work with to make this as good as the first movie. I really didn’t get the feeling that there was enough creative effort put into this film to make it succeed in the creative vein.
One of the bigger problems here is that Halloween II feels scattered. The first film had a distinct plot progression as elements gradually converged with one another in a tight, cohesive way. This sequel is extremely loose in that regard. Laurie is essentially a stationary target throughout the movie, spending a good chunk of it asleep or screaming, but Michael Myers roams about the hospital killing everyone else while Loomis is out scouring the streets for Michael. No longer is Loomis in sync with his prey anticipating his psychology and instinctual impulses. He’s tagging along with the police instead of driving the narrative forward. Even the majority of his dialogue feels retreaded from the first movie as he re-explains the history of himself and Michael, and his talk about evil incarnate. It entirely feels like it is only there in case someone watching this movie never saw the first one. Even Donald Pleasance seems a tad monotonous delivering this reworked dialogue. While his performance is still of a high quality, there’s just nothing new for him to do here. The film also hardly feels like it’s building any momentum. John Carpenter reportedly had a very difficult time coming up with a story for this film while writing the script, and it really does show. Dr. Loomis and Laurie Strode have next to nothing to do here except uncover newly conceived secrets about Michael and Laurie’s past, which amounts to nothing. There’s no mounting tension heading into the third act, and Laurie’s chase scene earlier on is very mild and slow paced. This film doesn’t offer a sense of escalating threat until the last few minutes before Loomis engulfs himself and Michael in an inferno. The pacing is very monotonous because the story is very loose and lacks directional momentum.
The supporting characters here are mostly a lot of interchangeable hospital staff going about their mundane duties getting killed, and an audience likely couldn’t care less about any one of them. They feel like standard, hollow slasher film fodder, but without even the crutch of a stereotype to make them funny or entertaining. Carpenter’s original was smartly and greatly cast filling out very lively characters, but here, there are just so many throwaway characters with very little personality that very little care was needed to put together a memorable supporting cast. Even Sheriff Brackett vanishes from the film after learning of his daughter’s death, and so, we get new police officers who have really nothing fresh or pertinent to contribute to the story.
And it really is a shame that Jamie Lee Curtis got hooked into doing this film. It is an utter waste of her talents. She spends the majority of the film either laying in a hospital bed, running away from Michael Myers, or hiding in a parked car. This is a sequel that brings people back to simply do nothing new or challenging. To me, it’s another sign that there was a lack of creative drive behind this. Every character feels either generic or wasted. Also, since Jamie Lee Curtis had since adopted a shorter hairstyle, she had to be fitted with this blatantly obvious bad wig. This just further adds to the nagging inconsistencies between the two films.
Now, I know there are people who are fans of Dick Warlock’s Shape, but I have never liked his lethargic, robotic movements at all. If this movie is supposed to pick up at the exact moment the first left off, there should have been a demand for consistency. Nick Castle’s Shape moved with a relentless fluidity. He felt like a shark hunting his prey with a fierce single-minded focus. Warlock is so horribly stiff that I see no ferocity or cunning intellect here. Before, Michael’s actions had a clearly evident intelligence and deliberateness behind them. He stalked his prey with patience and purpose. He observed them before striking. Here, he just shows up and starts killing like a mindless machine, and to me, that’s just not interesting or intriguing at all. Warlock is a great stuntman, but as Michael Myers, he does nothing good for me.
I can appreciate some bad slasher movies because many of them at least show that they are trying. Their end result might not be creatively successful, but the filmmakers put forth a visible effort to make a somewhat effective horror film. For me, Halloween II doesn’t even give me that much. I find it to be a very dull, bland, and boring slasher movie. It has none of the atmospheric tension or magic that John Carpenter harnessed for the first movie, and the story is very lazy even for a slasher film. I think Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers is the vastly superior sequel in every aspect. Also, released the same year, I passionately believe that Friday The 13th, Part 2 is one of the best slasher films ever made. I don’t hate Halloween II. It just doesn’t do enough either way to motivate a passionate response from me. Any other films in this franchise I don’t end up reviewing are simply because I don’t wish to subject myself to them again or even for the first time.
RavensFilm Productions presents the Forever Cinematic Friday The 13th movie retrospective covering all twelve films in the slasher franchise. Reviews by Nick Michalak.
Friday The 13th (1980)
Friday The 13th, Part 2 (1981)
Friday The 13th, Part 3 (1982)
Friday The 13th: The Final Chapter (1984)
Friday The 13th, Part V: A New Beginning (1985)
Friday The 13th, Part VI: Jason Lives (1986)
Friday The 13th, Part VII: The New Blood (1988)
Friday The 13th, Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan (1989)
Jason Goes To Hell: The Final Friday (1993)
Freddy vs. Jason (2003)
To 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.
This 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.
With 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.
Sequels 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.
Horror 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.
Many attribute the birth of the slasher genre to John Carpenter’s Halloween. However, a small Canadian film from 1974 laid the groundwork for the genre and especially Carpenter’s seminal classic. Black Christmas is likely known to younger horror fans by way of the remake that I never saw. You do yourself a serious disservice if you have never seen the original because it is still a greatly effective piece of horror filmmaking with a collection of surprisingly notable talents involved. Who would have ever thought that the director of the beloved family film classic A Christmas Story would have once done a Christmas-themed slasher movie?
The college town of Bedford is receiving an unwelcome guest this Christmas. As the residents of sorority house Pi Kappa Sig prepare for the festive season, a demonic stranger begins to stalk the house. A series of grisly obscene phone calls start to plague the residents of the sorority and soon they will each meet their fate at the hands of the psychotic intruder. As the Police try to trace the phone calls, they discover that nothing is as it seems.
Watching this film you will see right from the start its influence. The killer, Billy, as he refers to himself, is hidden almost entirely throughout the film through the use of a point of view camera. Clearly, this trick would be re-used in both Halloween and Friday The 13th, but neither achieves it quite as well as Black Christmas. That’s because of what more is added to it in terms of the killer’s psychotic behavior. Director Bob Clark creates an amazing sense of unease with the point of view camera work. The wide angle lens coupled with the slightly unsteady camera movement reflects the psychosis of this killer. The completely deranged phone calls are still frighteningly disturbing. They got right under my skin from the start, and continue to escalate as the film progresses. The radically unhinged psyche of this deranged killer is manically on display throughout the film, and Clark wastes no time establishing the nerve-racking suspense and horror. The fact that we know there is a crazed killer hiding out in the attic, unknown to everyone in the film, immediately injects suspense and terror into nearly every scene in that house. I will admit, it’s been a very long time since I’ve watched this film, and damn is it still insanely creepy and effective.
Black Christmas was an especially low budget film, and so, it has a rough, grainy quality. However, it is photographed very solidly showing the talent involved, and even then, the rugged quality of the film stock adds to the dark, unsettling tone. The pacing might feel slow to a certain audience, but this is not a film that drags along. Every methodically paced moment is used to great suspenseful effect, and Bob Clark knows so immensely well how to elicit these spine tingling feelings. Each scene builds story, character, or towards the terror of the picture. Yet, the film still features a few fine moments of levity to give it a needed contrast on a rare occasion. It also has a collection of stunningly solid talents in front of the camera.
Olivia Hussey is a wonderful lead portraying Jess with a lot of compassion and vulnerability. Hussey has a sophistication and warmth to hear in addition to maturity and intelligence. This builds Jess into a relatable character to worry about on multiple levels, and she plays terrified exquisitely well. She also does feel like a woman coming into her own as Jess deals with her boyfriend Peter. He wants to have a baby with her, but she’s against the idea creating a troubling friction between them. You might think this is a frivolous subplot, but it directly ties into the mystery and paranoia about the film’s killer moving forward. Keir Dullea, most well known from 2001: A Space Odyssey, is quite superb in this very conflicted and emotionally aggressive and unstable role. He’s very intriguing to watch as the relationship between Peter and Jess is torn apart, and begins to become a perceived menacing threat. Dullea and Hussey work exceptionally well with one another laying out the drama between them smartly and poignantly.
And yes, this film has John Saxon. That automatically increases its coolness factor. I just love the authority and weight he brings with him in anything I see from him. As Lieutenant Fuller, he’s everything you’d expect – confident, level headed, and concise. He really echoes this performance in A Nightmare On Elm Street, but surely builds upon that. As Fuller, he’s rock solid, just the way I want my John Saxon, but still has a moment of two of levity that is very much welcomed.
Margot Kidder puts in a surprising performance. Sorority sister Barb is meant to be rather crass and heartless, and Kidder hits that right on the mark. Add in the constant smoking and drinking, and you’ve got a character that is not endearing. Yet, she makes a definite impression. The rest of the cast is not particularly notable, but everyone does a very solid job with their distinct characters. They make this a horror film with likable characters who you can easily fear for as lethal danger stalks them from the shadows.
Black Christmas definitely feels like a 1970’s horror film. Beyond the aforementioned dark, grainy look and the obvious fashion and hairstyles, this film has almost a similar style as The Exorcist. There’s very little score except in exceptionally key moments as Bob Clark uses the silent unease of the house to great effect. The phone calls are jarring enough without overcompensating with a score. The use of the Christmas music sets the tone wonderfully using the serene sound in an unexpectedly haunting way. Scenes like when our killer is stalking through the house while Christmas carolers sing outside is simply brilliant. Juxtaposing these angelic voices with a moment of suspense and violence is truly inspired, and is filmed gorgeously.
There are terribly creepy moments all throughout such as seeing just a shadow creeping into the background while Jess is on the phone with the police, or simply anytime the POV shot has our killer spying on these young ladies from upstairs. And the shot of the eye through the door jam has become iconic and chilling as it sets off the film’s final act. And the climax is brilliantly crafted with a great use of shadow, misdirection, and taut tension. Just when you believe all is laid to rest, this ending gives you one final ominous moment of terror. Wrapping it all up together, you see the brilliant touches that Clark and screenwriter Roy Moore put into this film. In later years, it likely would’ve been a film of high body count, gratuitous sex, and little character. However, in the same year that brought us The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, you get a film that is very well written that connects you with these characters, gives you something to care about with them, and then, set them against a very deranged and unseen killer. It is a film of great suspense and ratcheted up tension that will leave prone audiences choked up in their seats, and wanting to turn all the lights on in the house while checking every room and locking every door when its all over.
From Black Christmas, you can definitely see evocative elements for Halloween and When A Stranger Calls. This is absolutely one of the most influential slasher films without many people knowing it. Maybe the influence was a time or two removed, but this was the genesis of that genre in a clearly defined form. This is a classic that doesn’t get the recognition it so very much deserves. This was director Bob Clark’s final foray into the horror genre, and it’s odd to see his career veer into comedy in the 1980’s, then very silly and wretchedly received kid’s films in the final years of his life. Regardless, we will always have this amazingly effective horror and suspense film to scare us on a dark, quiet evening. As this film’s tagline says, “If this movie doesn’t make your skin crawl… It’s on too tight!”