What do The Amityville Horror, Friday the 13th and A Nightmare On Elm Street all have in common? They are all classic horror films and are all remade by the same producer and every single remake sucked! That's right you heard me, they were all filthy trash movies made only for the sake of making money. The remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street sucked for many reasons but primarily due to excessive computer graphics, a convoluted story line, not one talented actor in the movie and changing the history of Freddy Krueger, and those are just a few reasons. Heather Langencamp (the original Nancy Thompson), Wes Craven (Original director) and Robert England (the original Freddy Krueger) are probably all hospitalized with nausea after watching this piece of garbage movie that did nothing but rake in $32 million at the box office. Sorry Michael Bay, box office revenue does not make a good movie, just look at the rest of your recent projects. I should warn you that there are spoilers to the remake in this review and I am assuming that those reading this review have seen the original film at least one time.
First bad thing about this movie: excessive computer graphics. Let's talk a little bit about the budget of the original film. The budget was roughly $2 million. If we were to adjust that amount for inflation, it would equal roughly $5 million today. Now the budget for this movie was $35 million, at this point you should be able to realize where I am going with this one. What made the original film so successful was that Wes Craven never intended for the film to be anything else but a B-Class horror movie that would scare people. Robert England seemed to know how to scare audiences as Freddy but still wink at the camera at the same time, and that is exactly how a horror movie becomes successful; however there was no winking at the camera in the remake. Freddy took himself way to seriously, and the computer graphics used for Freddy's face almost looked like they were not completed. He kind of looked like a burned up Avatar character. There were a few scenes where the computer graphics were so extreme that they came across like cartoon sequences.
Second major bad thing about this movie: changing the history of Freddy Krueger. In the original film, (yes the original is a historical film not a movie) all we know about Freddy is that he allegedly killed at least 20 children and the parents hunted him down and torched him. Then Freddy takes revenge on the parents by killing their children when they sleep. The only time that we learn anything about Freddy is when Nancy's mother disclosed the history of Fred Krueger and how she and her friends killed him. This was my favorite scene in the original film, after Nancy's mother tells her daughter, "I even took his knives" and shows Nancy the infamous glove with blades molded into the fingers. I still get goosebumps even thinking about it. I remember having nightmares for weeks after seeing the original film, because Freddy was a villain who was evil and deserved to be killed. Not even death could keep this evil child killer down. In the remake, Freddy was not an evil man before he was killed, he was a benevolent gardener at a pre school who loved children. He would play with them on the grass and even took them into his secret room where they could color and talk about the lovely pictures on his wall. Later we learn that the children started to come home with marks on their bodies, and I assume we are supposed to associate scratches on children's backs with pedophilia. I really do not understand how anybody could approve of such hammy screen writing. The only theory I can devise is that Micheal Bay had spent so much money on the computer graphics that he was not left with much in his budget to pay the people who wrote the script for the movie (Wesley Strick and Eric Heisserer). The writing was just so bad that it was almost embarassing to watch.
I want to point out another stupid part of the screen writing. During swimming practice the male heroine (Yes I know, a male and female heroine in the same horror movie) falls asleep while swimming and is pulled beneath the water. He then emerges in a filthy pool of water outside of an abandoned factory in a dream scene in his speedos and goggles. I am dead serious, in his speedos. In his dream, he sees the mortal Freddy Krueger being chased by the parents who are hunting him down for scratching the backs of their children. Before we know it one of the parents throws a burning can into the factory where Freddy is taking shelter and poor Freddy is burned to a crisp. Seriously burned to a crisp, he starts running in flames and I almost liked this scene until I realized it probably was a stunt man, then I really was not that impressed. The point of the matter is, what was going on in this sequence? Why was the male heroine having a vision of Freddy's death? Was Freddy trying to communicate with him beyond the grave? What the hell were you thinking Michael Bay? This is one of the many reasons why I feel that Micheal Bay should be prosecuted for making this movie. And what was the deal with the banging chord every time we saw Freddy in the movie? Roger Ebert thought Michael Bay was trying to "evoke a fearful Pavlovian response" and sadly I think that was exactly what Michael Bay was doing. If you watch the original film, the scariest part of the movie was when Freddy was lurking around in the dark waiting for the exact moment to kill. He just kind of appeared in every one of the sequences in the remake with a loud sound accompanying his arrival. Pretty original Michael Bay.
I really could go on for days with the reasons why the remake of A Nightmare On Elm Street sucked. But I think by now I have proven my point. This movie is another example of the dangers of a producer with too much money. Michael Bay, you have really shown where your priorities are in life. You have taken classical horror movies and reduced them to tacky modern day comedies, that don't intend to come across as funny. May I suggest that you stay away from any other horror projects and stick to Transformers? I am completely serious when I say do not see this movie if you are a die hard Freddy fan. You will be disappointed and you will develope a chronic hatred for Michael Bay. This was one of those movies where you are kind of tempted to ask for your money back. So this is the third week where I have gone to the movies and have been so disapointed that I immediately looked for the closest bar or beer distributor after leaving. Robin Hood comes out next week and Cate Blanchett has never really let me down, so I guess only time will tell.
