Hollywood, Hollywood. Why must you remake everything? Isn't it bad enough that you did a Friday the 13th "reboot" and a Halloween "reboot", must you have nailed the unholy trilogy? Was this really necessary? Were people screaming for the Nightmare franchise to be rebooted? Well, as we've all learned now by reading this blog, nothing, and I mean nothing, is sacred in Hollywood. Anyhow, I finally caught this one, just to see if it sucked as much as I thought it would. Actually, it didn't. Which doesn't mean it should have been made in the first place.
Everyone was applauding the casting of Jackie Earl Haley as Freddy. Now, I like Jackie...he was great as Rorschach in Watchmen. That doesn't mean he should get every role in the planet, though. He tries his best, and his best is still good, but I don't know if I buy him as Freddy. He's too short, for one thing, and unfortunately, they shot him short. I don't think Robert Englund is the tallest man on planet Earth, but filmmakers were usually smart enough to shoot him in a way that he filled the frame...made him more intimidating (at least, before he became jokey Freddy). There's one shot, when Freddy is fighting with Nancy, and I swear she's taller than him! Couldn't they have put a track below him, at least?
Then, there's Nancy. In this one, she's an outsider, right from the beginning. Okay, is that just to show us how isolated she is to begin with? So when Freddy starts his shenanigans, it's set up that she can't confide or turn to anyone (thus setting up her relationship with the smart, yet awkward boy)? I will say, this Freddy was kind of perplexing. What were they going for? Why turn Freddy from a murderer into a simple molester (if there is such a thing), and try and throw the "he didn't do it" angle at the viewer? Because, if you're watching this, you're either a dumb teenager (whose opinion doesn't count), or you've caught a Nightmare or 2, and know who Freddy is...and know Freddy can never, ever be innocent. He kills children in their dreams! It doesn't get more bad than that.
Then there's the Mom. Okay, so she hid evidence that Nancy went to that school, so she wouldn't remember what Freddy did to her. So why keep a class picture of Nancy and her schoolmates in her drawer! Neatly labelled with everyone's names! You know, Nancy doesn't need to remember Freddy diddling her, but I want to keep a souvenir of that! Huh? What kind of irresponsible parenting is this? Luckily, she gets the most gruesome death in the entire movie.
I will commend the filmmakers that they really tried hard to make Freddy serious. There are no real quips, and Freddy shows up a lot, and I do mean A LOT in this movie, which is satisfying, because you don't have to wait around to see Freddy. He shows up in the first 5 minutes. The makeup...I'm not completely sold on. I read they tried to emulate what a real burn victim would look like...but I like Frankenstein's green look, and what's the last time you saw a corpse that was green? So, that's fine and dandy, but why screw with a classic?
Anyhow, this movie was actually better than I thought it would be (which shows the expectations I walked in with). At least Freddy was serious, and he was doing stuff, and trying to get scares. The script didn't make sense at parts, I was indifferent to the new makeup, and Freddy wasn't menacing enough to live up to his predecessor, despite Haley's best try. Catch this one, only if you're a collector of the series, and you get every Nightmare, or whatever. Otherwise, you probably have a better movie to watch.
Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars.
- Stephenstein
No comments:
Post a Comment