Started by Brian Foster2 · · 👁 10 views · 134 replies
…
Jesse Booth2 said:These >s look absolutely terrible, and honestly, I have no clue why they even bothered making a > when all they're doing is spitting on the legacy of a total classic. I’ll probably end up seeing it anyway (because let's face it, I see everything), but I really don't get the point of this whole mess. 🤷
Kevin Bailey2 said:Maybe they're trying to bring it back from the dead. 😂
Freddy R. I. P.
I'm definitely watching it, whatever happens, happens.
cosmiclynx57 said:Same here.
I'm honestly just dying to see how it turns out—like, will it actually be a decent horror movie or what?
analograven5 said:But honestly, I don't think it'll come anywhere close to those older classics.😉
It's probably just because I was so much younger back then—some things hit way harder when you're a kid, you know? Now, everything feels a bit different.☕
These days, my expectations for movies are so much higher, and let's face it, it's pretty rare for anything to actually blow me away anymore.🙄
Freddy Krueger will Return studio reportedly wants its next Nightmare in 3d by Jim Vejvoda May 4
The studio apparently wants the next installment of the nightmare to be in 3D.
by Jim Vejvoda
On May 4, 2010, Warner Bros. expressed such satisfaction with the success of its reboot of a Nightmare on Elm Street—which debuted at number one last weekend pulling in over $32 million—that they’ve already greenlit a follow-up.
"We haven't landed on a plot yet, but this stands as the biggest horror debut in the April-May window, proving the franchise still has plenty of life in it," Dan Fellman informed The Wrap. With a modest $27 million production budget, the reboot has already broken even.
And not only will Warners make a sequel, they plan on doing it in—get this—3D. Groundbreaking.
fadedseal8 said:Freddy Krueger will Return studio reportedly wants its next Nightmare in 3d by Jim Vejvoda May 4
The studio apparently wants the next installment of the nightmare to be in 3D.
by Jim Vejvoda
On May 4, 2010, Warner Bros. expressed such satisfaction with the success of its reboot of a Nightmare on Elm Street—which debuted at number one last weekend pulling in over $32 million—that they’ve already greenlit a follow-up.
"We haven't landed on a plot yet, but this stands as the biggest horror debut in the April-May window, proving the franchise still has plenty of life in it," Dan Fellman informed The Wrap. With a modest $27 million production budget, the reboot has already broken even.
And not only will Warners make a sequel, they plan on doing it in—get this—3D. Groundbreaking.
it was only a matter of time.
briskhound2 said:
Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy (2010)
An eight-hour documentary— 🙏 finally review all works. Four hours are just one continuous stretch, then the rest is made up of these split-up extras, extended interviews, location visits with the cast showing how everything looks today... it's all there. All the big players from the franchise (Wes Craven, Robert Shaye, Robert Englund, Renny Harlin... you name it) talk about the process, the concepts, the scripts, how they pulled things off, what went down on set, and how the public actually reacted to the series—it’s basically all in one spot. Johnny Depp and Patricia Arquette aren't there in person, but it honestly works without them (Depp shows up via some old footage from the movie). The best part—when they discuss how the second film was such a hit in Europe and show the American cover for the film. For any fans out there, this is essential viewing... just a must-watch.
The extras are pretty interesting, though maybe a bit mid—some cool fan stuff, some locations that haven't changed at all—but still, it wraps the whole thing up nicely. 10/10
Megan Gray6 said:Here we go—a new teaser that actually seems to have some substance compared to the previous one:
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) Trailer 2
I have to say something about this one—it’s pretty much impossible to find anything good here—this movie is an absolute train wreck. To start with the good stuff—which won't take long—you get that iconic melody (thank God they didn't turn it into some hip-hop remix), and a few dream sequences actually have a decent atmosphere, and... yeah, that's about it.briskhound2 said:A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) Why?
What really fails is—well, the total butchering of the original. Every single character is so unlikable that you’re practically rooting for Freddy's knives to find them... they're irritating to a degree you rarely see in cinema. Everyone is trying so hard to be "trendy," like they're from some Sex and the City wannabe generation, all the cool poses and looks—it's almost unwatchable. Nancy has basically turned into Bella Swan from Twilight, some weird school geek who's—well, you know—in some kind of mess, and Glen is just a loser, some hip-hop kid type replacing what should have been a Johnny Depp vibe... everyone is acting all edgy and depressed and "alternative," like they've already dealt with nightmare issues and know everything... and half of them look like they just wandered off the set of Melrose Place. Then there's the fact that the whole movie is just a patchwork of scenes ripped from the original. They swapped roles around, so now Tina / Kriss is the one with the massive classroom scene (since Nancy doesn't even exist in this version). That famous ceiling slaughter scene—I mean, how do you even mess that up? Basically, Tina / Kriss is FLYING across the ceiling like Spider-Man—one quick cut (softened, apparently, so we don't ruin the lead actress's hair)—and that's it. The rest is just stacking stupidity on top of stupidity and straight-up copying entire sequences from the original...
As for Freddy Krueger—that's a whole other issue. Look, I have nothing against Jack Earl Haley as an actor, but this isn't the role for him—the guy is barely five feet tall and thin, and all the other actors tower over him. His voice is a chronic rasp, a pathetic attempt at imitating Englund's intonation (kudos to the writers, though, since they didn't give him a single smart line like the old Freddy had) and when that fails, he just drifts into a Ledger-style Joker vibe. And the look? It's a joke. Freddy ended up looking like some little gray cartoon alien—his face literally reminds me of those caricatures. He carries himself like a wet hen—there's none of that "I'm gonna slice you up, kid" swagger left... honestly, I regret watching the original series before this because this version of Freddy is just... well, it says a lot about the movie that Wes Craven, Robert Shaye, Robert Englund, and everyone else who built the first film wouldn't want any association with this mess.
So—this movie is for the generation that turned Twilight into some hazy blockbuster hit. The characters are tailor-made to mimic that specific vibe—the new Jesse is basically Edward Cullen with that exact stare and look... the horror is just there for show, you know, just so those kids can feel like they're dealing with "real problems"... it's ugly, just plain ugly what they did to this film. Michael Bay should probably be legally banned from touching classic franchises because he always manages to screw them up completely. A massive, highly generous score of 2/10
gentlebadger88 said:I see you're quite the expert at English since you managed to find bad reviews on IMDb and translate them into American instead of providing an actual argument of your own 👎. My friend caught onto that immediately while we were reading these comments at my place after seeing the movie in theaters.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1179056/...&p=1#163453908
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1179056/...3362#163263362
You’re probably one of those people who approaches horror remakes with this attitude of: "I already know this is going to be garbage based on a trailer that dropped months ago," and then you go ahead and watch the movie anyway 🙄 with that exact same chip on your shoulder. As for comparing Twilight fans to whatever this is... honestly, I'm just not going there. I don't want to get a lifetime ban for what I'd actually say about that comparison. Look, in most cases, the originals are better—like Halloween or Friday the 13th—and yeah, that's true here too, but the movie isn't actually that bad. By the way, if you think the character looks like a doll or something (which is such a cliché thing to say, let's be real), have you ever actually seen a real burned face in person? Do you even know what that looks like? And regarding everyone being unlikable... looking at Katie Cassidy and your comment, one has to wonder 🤣. The lead actor really nailed the performance (honestly, I don't know who could play him better RIGHT NOW, since we can't expect old Robert Englund to act forever). The atmosphere is genuinely solid, there's blood up to your knees, and jump scares every few minutes, but I guess people expected too much and kept comparing it back to the original, so it just didn't land the way they wanted.
You're probably one of those people who watches horror remakes thinking, "I already know this is going to be trash based on a trailer that dropped months ago," and then walks into the theater with that exact attitude 🙄.
briskhound2 said:
New poster just dropped. Even without Englund, the flick doesn't look half bad based on the trailer—though it feels like they ripped off bits from pretty much every great entry in the franchise... still, fingers crossed it actually works 🙂
As for that comparison between Twilight fans and this movie, I'll pass on commenting because I'll probably get a lifetime ban for what I'd actually say. And yeah, for me, the originals are usually better most of the time (like Halloween or Friday the 13th), and it's the same here, but still, the movie isn't all that bad.
Btw, if you think the guy looks like a doll or something (which is a total cliché, but alright), have you ever actually seen a burned face in real life to know how it looks?
The atmosphere itself is actually pretty solid—lots of blood, gore, and jump scares every few minutes—but honestly, people probably expected too much and just kept comparing it to the original, so it didn't land nearly as well...
briskhound2 said:🤦 So you have to read comments with a friend just to figure out what you'd say? Not me. Whatever's on my mind goes straight to the keyboard...You're probably one of those people who watches horror remakes thinking, "I already know this is going to be trash based on a trailer that dropped months ago," and then walks into the theater with that exact attitude 🙄.
🤦
To quote myself again—everything I said was basically what I expected just from looking at the trailer.As for that comparison between Twilight fans and this movie, I'll pass on commenting because I'll probably get a lifetime ban for what I'd actually say. And yeah, for me, the originals are usually better most of the time (like Halloween or Friday the 13th), and it's the same here, but still, the movie isn't all that bad.
Please, go ahead—I'm dying to hear your take (just give me the censored version)—because when I see characters who are basically just "emo" types whose whole vibe relies on looks and brooding stares, I've seen enough. BTW—The Texas Chain Saw Massacre and The Last House on the Left are way better than their originals—the classics aren't holy scripture. A bad movie is just a bad movie.Btw, if you think the guy looks like a doll or something (which is a total cliché, but alright), have you ever actually seen a burned face in real life to know how it looks?
Seriously, I get it. You know what I mean?The atmosphere itself is actually pretty solid—lots of blood, gore, and jump scares every few minutes—but honestly, people probably expected too much and just kept comparing it to the original, so it didn't land nearly as well...
And that’s supposed to be "good horror"—just endless blood and cheap shocks every five seconds? Not really my thing. To add to that—the real magic and charm of the old Nightmare films was that you never quite knew if you were watching a dream or reality... that's where the actual tension lived. This one doesn't have that at all. It’s not just missing; it’s almost like they’re shouting, "Pay attention! This is a DREAM now, so get ready for Freddy to jump out." If that's cool to someone—hey—good for them. It just isn't for me.
gentlebadger88 said:First off, I wasn't reading comments with my friend; we just hopped on the forum after the theater to see what people were saying about the movie, and my buddy goes, "Oh, I read this on IMDb," and found the link immediately. So stop talking nonsense and twisting my words. It's obvious you're doing this because it looks like everything you wrote was just run through a translator. As for the burnt face thing, obviously I've seen it—I've seen enough in my professional life—so I don't get why there's such a big deal over some doll, an alien, or whatever other nonsense. Regarding the cast, that kid who seemed obsessed with not being in the movie was unlikable to me too (if I remember right, he's the one from > and >), while the lead actor was okay. He's not >, but still... They definitely could have finished the series without this version and wrapped it up with a solid seven installments (not counting that trash >) but hey, the movie is decent enough with plenty of scenes and shocks (whatever, to each their own ☕). Honestly, I think people are overreacting and trashing it in such vague ways. Not to mention half the people in the theater didn't even watch the movie; they were just squirming in their seats and then trashed it online afterward. That's not just happening with this movie; it happens with truly great movies all the time. One thing about this movie I REALLY HATE, though, is how incredibly stupid it is. If I remember correctly from the old series, Freddy was the killer whose parents burned him alive in revenge. Here, it turns out he was just some farmer who kidnapped kids and dragged them into a basement to assault them in every way possible, causing physical injuries, and somehow—using some weird logic—all the kids had repressed memories, like total amnesia for that entire period, regarding both Freddy and the events. None of them remembered a single thing. That makes zero sense to me 🤷.
