The Trailer For The "A Nightmare on Elm Street" Remake

[ShadowFyre]

That was in the writing, not the performance.



Michael Bay isn't the director. He's a producer.
And he didn't direct the Friday the 13th remake either. (plus, that remake was the best Friday the 13th movie to come out since the original 4, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.)

As if being better than Friday the 13th 5-10 is anything difficult. Those movies just SUCKED!

 

[dusttick11]

Well I love the original, but I'm still looking forward to this one.
I didn't think I'd like the remake of Friday the 13th, but I
did, way more than even I thought possible. Go figure.


As for Freddy's make up in this one, it looks more like an
actual burn victim. It's more realistic in terms of what fire
will do to a person. The original Freddy had more of a hellish
monster appearance.

Also are they going the route in this film that Freddy was actually
innocent when the vigilantes burned him? If that's the case than that
adds an interesting twist to the story.

 

[ShadowFyre]

Well I love the original, but I'm still looking forward to this one.
I didn't think I'd like the remake of Friday the 13th, but I
did, way more than even I thought possible. Go figure.


As for Freddy's make up in this one, it looks more like an
actual burn victim. It's more realistic in terms of what fire
will do to a person. The original Freddy had more of a hellish
monster appearance.

Also are they going the route in this film that Freddy was actually
innocent when the vigilantes burned him? If that's the case than that
adds an interesting twist to the story.

If they do go the route of Freddy being innocent, it changes the accepted canon. In The Final Nightmare, they showed scenes of Freddy being the Springwood Slasher and him making the iconic glove with razor blades. If they are actually going this route, I'd have to think it's more of a reboot than a remake, which would be much more interesting to me. I was actually disappointed when the trailer showed a scene that looked a lot like the Tina death scene from the first Elm Street. I want to see something different.

 

[alchemy]

Damnit! You beat me to it!

Great post, man!

 

[alchemy]

After watching the trailer, I have two quick complaints:

The sweater unveiling was stupid. He might as well been wearing a superman symbol under his jacket.

Is it me, or does the Jackie Freddy look REALLY little?

I don't know...I really wish they had brought some fresh ideas to the film whilst still keeping the character intact.

 

[Angel_2]

Without Robert Englund this movie is gonna be shit but i'll still see it

 

[Tamia78]

The sweater unveiling was stupid. He might as well been wearing a superman symbol under his jacket.

I agree. Although THAT would've also made an interesting twist, eh? 😀

I liked all of the NOES movies. The later ones were definitely campy, but I still enjoyed them. Look forward to see what Haley has to offer to the character.

--T

 

[BellaRisa]

If they do go the route of Freddy being innocent, it changes the accepted canon. In The Final Nightmare, they showed scenes of Freddy being the Springwood Slasher and him making the iconic glove with razor blades. If they are actually going this route, I'd have to think it's more of a reboot than a remake, which would be much more interesting to me. I was actually disappointed when the trailer showed a scene that looked a lot like the Tina death scene from the first Elm Street. I want to see something different.

This. Also, I was just talking to my husband, and he (like a few people I know) always thought Freddy was innocent, and that was why he was seeking revenge on the children of the parents who killed him. I've never thought that and the original script mentions his mis-trial leading to the vigilante justice...

 

[Soda Bobinski]

Michael Bay's name is attached to this project. Strike one.

KrazieDog's right ... Freddy now sounds like a Slingblade bogeyman. Strike two.

In a case of mistaken identity , Fred Krueger is wrongfully accused of crimes he didn't commit & is hunted down by a mob of angry parents & killed in a most gruesome manner. Awww ... poor guy. He di'int do nuthin'. 🙁 Strike three.


*sigh* If they do , indeed , play the 'Freddy was innocent' angle , then that turns him into a sympathetic character & he is then somewhat justified in his posthumous actions of avenging his death.

Maybe it's just me , but that shit is wack. I don't want to be made to feel sorry for Freddy. Dude was a monster in life & then became the end all - be all of monsters in death after the parents of Springwood torched his ass.


The only thing I find slightly interesting about this possible new wrinkle is ... if Krueger is truly innocent & is the wrong person hunted down & killed , then that leaves the real perpetrator alive & out there somewhere ....... waiting. *cue spooky music*

 

[Lord Doctor]

It looks promising, although Kruger looks more mummified than burned. I expect that the humour will be gone from it also.

I don't like remakes so much as they tell a story I already know but I will see this one anyway coz It's Kruger, even though not the real one.



in the trailer there, it's only Kruger's word that he's innocent. He wouldn't exactly say "yeah I did it" to a lynch mob.
Maybe I am unaware of something?

 

[Radiohead 7140]

There is very little humor in nightmare 1. It is pretty disturbing and freddy doesn't crack any ridiculous jokes as in sequels.

Agreed with all above that freddy being innocent destroys the canon of the film. Though it does make it potentially more interesting, or at least a good change for the remake. Candyman is a pretty good 'nice-guy turned evil due to vengeful murder' concept. too bad, as with nightmares, they made awful sequels.

Bella, not sure what basis your husband has to think that? There is zero indication in the original that he was actually innocent (and the script isn't really deep enough to interpret things like that), and subsequent movies (I know at least final nightmare) actually showed flashbacks of when he was a living child-killer. Confused on that front

 

[dusttick11]

If they do go the route of Freddy being innocent, it changes the accepted canon. In The Final Nightmare, they showed scenes of Freddy being the Springwood Slasher and him making the iconic glove with razor blades. If they are actually going this route, I'd have to think it's more of a reboot than a remake, which would be much more interesting to me. I was actually disappointed when the trailer showed a scene that looked a lot like the Tina death scene from the first Elm Street. I want to see something different.

Yes I knew in the original he was an actual child killer, and as Bella stated
above, there was a mistrial and that lead to the viglante justice. I beleive
the police screwed something up and vital evidence had to be tossed out
of court.

In the TV show Freddy's Nightmares, the very first episode deals with this.
Basically tells the whole story of how it went down. I just think it
would make a very cool twist in this one if they killed the wrong guy
and that's why he is back for revenge. I don't think they will though.

As for the ripping off of the jacket to get to the sweater.
The only justification I can think of for that is he's trying to escape
and he wants to throw off his pursuers, by tossing his outer wear. Kind
of like a perp does when their trying to evade police during a foot pursuit.
LOL. Then he gets torched and is forever trapped in that iconic outfit.
Who Knows LOL. Edit: after watching the trailer again he took his jacket
off because the back of it caught fire. Yeah they probably could
have gone without that scene.

Anyone notice those little girls are back, kinda like the Shining. Were they
victims of his in the original? I can't remember.

 

[Radiohead 7140]

When the original movie was made, they didn't realize the iconic value of that sweater. I mean, having no idea it would blow up the way it did, they didn't realize the full iconic value of lots of things. But the glove for example, was shown in the opening credits being made.

Lots of elements of the original became symbolic ipso facto. His name wasn't even Freddy at first, it was Fred.

Now, making the "original" nightmare but with full hindsight, the sweater is one of many things they're going to highlite. I'm not saying that scene was particularly tasteful, I'm not sure. When dealing with this genre of movies, the usual methods of critique go out the window. whole different ballgame, one of the reason i love those old classics, and a big reason i never got into the newer (and arguably better from a classical standpoint) horror movies like Saw and whatnot

 

[TklDuo-Drew]

Uuhhhhh..............no.




Drew

 

[Korastus]

Nothing about the plot of this film has implied that Krueger is innocent in the movie. You wouldn't scream about how you murdered children while being chased by an angry mob either.
Honestly, some of you are jumping on that just because you don't want to like this. :/

 

[Korastus]

Michael Bay's name is attached to this project. Strike one.

Again, he's a producer for this film. His involvement with the project is: helping pay for it, arranging for distribution, and hiring personnel.
He has no hand in the writing or acting of the film

Seriously people. Chill out.

 

[dusttick11]

Nothing about the plot of this film has implied that Krueger is innocent in the movie. You wouldn't scream about how you murdered children while being chased by an angry mob either.
Honestly, some of you are jumping on that just because you don't want to like this. :/

I'm not jumping on that at all. I just asked if they were going to make it
that he was innocent in this version, because in the trailer when he's
being chased by the vigilantes he screams "What do you think I did, I
didn't do anything" in a very terrified voice. I think he is a serial killer
though because those little girls in the trailer have the glove blade marks
on their clothing.

I'm actually looking forward to this, because I enjoyed the remake of
Friday The 13th. Don't get me wrong I think a lot of remakes suck, but
I'm still willing to watch and give them a chance before I decide.

 

[Soda Bobinski]

Honestly, some of you are jumping on that just because you don't want to like this. :/

Speaking only for myself ... you got me.

Again, he's a producer for this film. His involvement with the project is: helping pay for it, arranging for distribution, and hiring personnel.
He has no hand in the writing or acting of the film

I'm well aware that Michael Bay is the producer , thank you.

... & being that he is the film's producer , I'm fairly certain that means he wields the greatest degree of control & influence over how the film is shaped.

Now , whether Bay outright hired the director , writers , etc. himself , I do not know , but I'm guessing he had a strong say in those decisions. At the very least , he hired the people who hired those people. Which means , those who were brought aboard this project are those who are going to best carry out the vision of Michael Bay & how he wants the movie to be.

If we've learned anything by now , it's that the vision of Michael Bay is utter rubbish.

So , yes ... Michael Bay's name is attached to this project. Strike one.

Seriously people. Chill out.

I don't think anyone has flown off the handle regarding the criticizing of this movie.


Yet.

 

[Adam]

Pretty good looking trailer. Now if... if the story changes to reveal that Krueger was actually innocent of his crimes (which I fully realize is only speculation on the part of some), that much would actually get under my skin quite a bit. I thought the premise of Freddy being a monster in real life, then continuing his crimes from beyond the grave, made him a bone-chilling character. Making him a sympathetic type would ruin it for me.

 

[Radiohead 7140]

What will get more heated? this thread or the death penalty thread

 

[ShadowFyre]

This. Also, I was just talking to my husband, and he (like a few people I know) always thought Freddy was innocent, and that was why he was seeking revenge on the children of the parents who killed him. I've never thought that and the original script mentions his mis-trial leading to the vigilante justice...

I never understood how anyone could get the impression that Freddy was innocent. The mistrial doesn't lead to his being innocent. IIRC, the mistrial was due to police misconduct. Freddy was never found innocent. The parents of the murdered children did take justice into their own hands, hunted down, and burned Freddy alive. To add to the fact that Freddy was not innocent, in Nightmare on Elm Street 6: Freddy's Dead (The Final Nightmare), Maggie actually sees Freddy creating the razor glove and Freddy talks about the kids that he has killed. There is just no way that Freddy is innocent.

 

[Korastus]

Now , whether Bay outright hired the director , writers , etc. himself , I do not know , but I'm guessing he had a strong say in those decisions. At the very least , he hired the people who hired those people. Which means , those who were brought aboard this project are those who are going to best carry out the vision of Michael Bay & how he wants the movie to be.

If we've learned anything by now , it's that the vision of Michael Bay is utter rubbish.

So , yes ... Michael Bay's name is attached to this project. Strike one.

A film producer's vision has nothing to do with the job they do. They're the financial weight of a project, not the creative part. The actor's carry out their vision of their characters, guided by the director's vision of the story, written according to the vision (you guessed it) of the writers.
Michael Bay hasn't shaped the story; indeed, he isn't involved in the creative process (of this film) enough to do so.

 

[ShadowFyre]

In the TV show Freddy's Nightmares, the very first episode deals with this.
Basically tells the whole story of how it went down. I just think it
would make a very cool twist in this one if they killed the wrong guy
and that's why he is back for revenge. I don't think they will though.

Anyone notice those little girls are back, kinda like the Shinning. Were they
victims of his in the original? I can't remember.

I thought I was the only one that even remembered Freddy's Nightmares and how the first show did show that Freddy was a child killer.

As for the little girls, I cannot recall it ever being explicitly stated in any of the movies or TV show if they were Kreuger victims. I think that it is fairly safe to assume that they are his victims, as people that appear in the nightmares are mostly victims or intended victims.

(I guess I will need to break out my NOES box set again!)

 

[alchemy]

This. Also, I was just talking to my husband, and he (like a few people I know) always thought Freddy was innocent, and that was why he was seeking revenge on the children of the parents who killed him. I've never thought that and the original script mentions his mis-trial leading to the vigilante justice...

No, Freddy definitely did it. The only reason he got off was because of a technicality on the search warrant.

 

[alchemy]

Michael Bay's name is attached to this project. Strike one.

KrazieDog's right ... Freddy now sounds like a Slingblade bogeyman. Strike two.

In a case of mistaken identity , Fred Krueger is wrongfully accused of crimes he didn't commit & is hunted down by a mob of angry parents & killed in a most gruesome manner. Awww ... poor guy. He di'int do nuthin'. 🙁 Strike three.


*sigh* If they do , indeed , play the 'Freddy was innocent' angle , then that turns him into a sympathetic character & he is then somewhat justified in his posthumous actions of avenging his death.

Maybe it's just me , but that shit is wack. I don't want to be made to feel sorry for Freddy. Dude was a monster in life & then became the end all - be all of monsters in death after the parents of Springwood torched his ass.


The only thing I find slightly interesting about this possible new wrinkle is ... if Krueger is truly innocent & is the wrong person hunted down & killed , then that leaves the real perpetrator alive & out there somewhere ....... waiting. *cue spooky music*

According to the script that's been circulating, they're not necessarily playing the innocent angle, they're playing the ambivalent angle. Fred insists that he's innocent, but all the evidence points to him being guilty.