Watch A Nightmare on Elm Street
Watch A Nightmare on Elm Street movie
- IMDB rating: 5.80
- IMDB votes: 4667
- Release Date: 2010
StumbleUpon
Del.icio.us
FavoritesMore information :
- A re-imagining of the horror icon Freddy Krueger, a serial-killer who wields a glove with four blades embedded in the fingers and kills people in their dreams, resulting in their real death in reality.
- tags: A Nightmare on Elm Street, Nightmare, Street, re-imagining, horror, icon, Freddy, Krueger, serial-killer, wields, glove, with, four, blades, embedded, fingers, kills, people, their, dreams, resulting, real, death, reality
Added: 29 April 2010
Vote: 53
Yet, another VERY disappointing attempt at a remake
When I began to watch this movie I unhappily knew that Robert Englundwould not be taking the role of Freddy Krueger and that was the maindisappointment for me. Freddy isn't Freddy. He's just a creepier guy(not in a good way), with no humour like the old Freddy, and looks likea zombie. This movie doesn't really suit the cast... The original moviehad a young cast who would look pretty terrified by the stalkings ofKrueger. In the remake it's spoilt brats who just get picked off one byone in their nightmares.
Another issue is the beginning of the movie when we see Freddy die. Youare not suppose to feel sympathy for him in that scene as I did withhis innocent and afraid face. It's like Halloween (2007), we feel sorryfor Michael Myers, we feel sorry for Jason (Friday the 13th(2009))because he watched his mother get decapitated.
Where did Freddy's jokes come in (Like in the original he said "How'sthis for a wet-dream?")? Where did his humour go? And how did he getthat zombie-like face he has now? I know producers need to come up withscarier ideas but Freddy's humour in the original scared the hell outof me. But with his threatening comments in this movie I was just-"Meh"
And yet this just ANOTHER VERY disappointing attempt at a remake.
Added: 1 May 2010
Vote: 10
Brutal, scary, suspenseful.
I've been a fan of horror movies since I was 14 years old, and I'veseen em all. Now I've been looking for months for a horror movie Ihaven't seen yet that would scare me. Haven't had any luck. I thoughtthe old NOES movies were good for their time but I don't really likeolder movies much.. so I got really excited when I saw the trailer forthe remake. This movie made me jump, bite my nails, had my eyes gluedto the screen the whole time, and even though I've already seen the oldone it still kept me guessing the whole time. Brutal, scary, andsuspenseful. Every movie me & my boyfriend have went to see in theatersfor the past year we walked out saying "well that wasn't worth themoney" With this one we walked out saying it was worth every penny. Ifyou haven't seen it get get your a$$ to the nearest theater... now!
User: paubangsAdded: 28 April 2010
Vote: 17
Needed more creativity and more story development
When I think back to the original nightmare that made it scary to fallasleep I always think of certain iconic scenes in the film. The claw inthe bath tub, the stairs melting under Nancy's feet as she runs infear, and Tina being thrown around her room with such relentless force.Well if you love those scenes and want to see them again look nofurther. The "Director" of the new Nightmare, if you want to call himthat, using many of the original scenes along with many "old schoolscare tactics".
I was really looking forward to this film. I hoped that the reimagining would take the concept of nightmares killing teens and reallyrun with the idea. Instead we get basic and easy directing along with ascript that looks to of been written in one sitting. The film itself isnot that long, so going you should assume the movie will be at a fastpace. I for one would of liked to of gotten more story and characterdevelopment. Any time I thought we were gonna get to know a characterthey end up dead. You really have no connections with any of thecharacters. So when they meet their end by the bladed hand of theirnightmarish stalker you really don't care.
As for the new Freddie. He was the one saving grace in this poor remakeof a classic. Jackie Earle Haley really dives into the role of FredKreuger. He makes you think there is more to his evil exterior and thatthere might be hope that he could change. Which of course is all justmisdirection to lore his victims closer to him. If there is a sequel itwill be because of Haley's performance.
As for the gore factor. Its next to nothing if you compare it to modernstandards. The original was ahead of its time with the on screen gore.I really was expecting some more unique scenes in which the directorreally explores the world of dreams and death scenes that make youafraid not just squeamish.
Not a bad movie but not great. If you want a remake that is like theoriginal with a few new twists then your in luck. If you want a newinventive look at the classic. Then maybe next time you and I will getour wish.
Added: 30 April 2010
Vote: 1
Jackie Earle Haley is lovely. The rest was rubbish.
Summary says it all. The only reason I gave this movie a seven isbecause of Haley. He remade this character for me, and I wish it justcould have been done better around him. It's rather depressing seeingsomething so great surrounded by garbage. Here he is trying to be allsneaky and kill people to get his long lost revenge on his own murder,and these kids practically kill themselves at every turn.
Haley gets the seven. Without him, I would be hard pressed to give it atwo. Only one good death, and that was the first, the rest of boringsecond draft material. It's was dreadfully unexciting, and justgenuinely stupid.
Added: 1 May 2010
Vote: 5
Best Nightmare since the original
I have been waiting for this movie since i first heard about it and imust say with mixed reaction since the remake of Friday The 13th was abomb IMO. This A Nightmare On Elm St far exceeded all of myexpectation.
The new incarnation of Freddy goes farther than Robert ever took him.This new Freddy is darker, more evil and sadistic than the original.The back story of this Freddy was so much better than the original, itgave it a more intense feeling and would make even the most hardenedhorror movie fans skin crawl in some parts.
This movie like all the Elm St's is not without it's comedic elementsbut they don't take it to far. They try to keep on track as much as thepossibly could, and stick to the story.
They did not skimp on the new Nancy, she is as strong and believable asthe original.
Well all i really need to say now is see this movie... then again...and again... and again... i know i will :D
Added: 1 May 2010
Vote: 4
I Thought it was better than...
90% of the other Bullsh1t remakes that Hollywood keeps pumping out..Last year (09) we had "My Bloody Valentine", "Friday the 13", "TheStepfather", "Last House On The Left", "Sorority Row" and "Halloween 2"to name a few. Basically The Olny good "Original" release of 2009 was"Drag Me To Hell"..
This year we've already had "The Crazies" - Coming Soon are "MothersDay" (Which may be good), "Pirahna 3D", "Straw Dogs", "Dont Be AfraidOf The Dark", "Friday The 13 II", "Halloween 3D", "Hellraiser 3D","Scanners", "The Orphanage", Night Of The Demons"... The List GoesFOREVER!! I Think Its BEYOND Fugked up that Hollywood keeps pumpin outthese remakes when all they have to do is copy the original 80'sslasher formula, create a villain and write a good script. But Anyways,I HATE to say it, I actually like this remake.. Freddy Looks/Soundsdifferent, The Directing/Cinematography was GREAT and the gore was nottoo bad either.. I don't support these lameass remakes AT ALL, but 1outta 10 ends up good, and i think they nailed it with this one.. Whatsgonna be LAME is if they make a "Nightmare on Elms Street 2" remake..Will they follow the original story and make it about Freddy trying toobtain a human form like the original? Probably not.. N.O.E.S II Sucked- Anyways shouldn't this film really be "Nightmare On Elm Street Part7"??? It technically could count as PART 8 if you count "Freddy Vs.Jason".. FUHK YOU Hollywood..
The fact that they remake mainstream and obscure horror films strictlyfor profit (and at the same time alienate fans) shows the TRUEshallowness of Hollywood studios.. It shows that film has becomenothing but profit and the actual ART has become a joke to be REMADE..Seriously.. If somebody repainted the MONA LISA would that be a bigmoney maker in the Art World?? If somebody remade some lame 80'sbestselling album like "Thriller" would everyone go out and buy it?Would it save the recording industry? It doesn't seem like ONE PERSONsupports these BULLSH1T remakes, so why keep making them?? BTW - "ClashOf The Titans" should have NEVER been messed with.. That sh!t makes meSICK!!
As for Freddy... It wasn't that bad.. BUT, It should've just been leftalone (and how could they leave out Robert Englund??)
Added: 30 April 2010
Vote: 15
A great new spin on a classic horror story.
I just got out of the midnight showing of this movie and I absolutelyloved it. The pacing was a lot quicker than the original and thecharacters aren't quite as well developed but I think it works becauseFreddy has so much screen time in this one. This movie basically takesthe best deaths of the original and grows upon them. I have always beena fan of these slasher movies and we all know that none of them aremasterpieces. Obviously, if you're looking for a story with a strongplot and great characters you should know not to be watching a slasherflick. I thought that this was probably the best remake of all of themodern takes on these movies. Much stronger than Friday the 13th andHalloween (yet I still enjoyed both). My only big complaint is the backstory of Freddy has been changed to quite an extent. If you're a fan ofthe originals then you should be able to point it out easily, and to anextent it takes away from how evil Freddy was before died and becamethe dream killer. All-in-all, a great modernization.
User: eaohioAdded: 30 April 2010
Vote: 9
a fresh new look at an old classic
This movie actually exceeded my expectations of what i thought theywould do to the nightmare. For those of you who don't know, this is nota remake of the first freddy but a new look at the original idea.myonly complaints weren't for the movie but for other patrons of thetheater. yes, we all know robert englund is a legend and can never bereplaced but he's like 60 now and no one wants to see a geriatricfreddy. If you're going to compare Haley and Englund, you're an idiot.Keep your thoughts to yourself and stay home in mommys basement, orderup another plate of pizza rolls and wait for it on DVD. If you can stayopen minded and appreciate a new take on an old favorite i don't thinkyou'll be disappointed. It's an old school slasher with a little moredepth. I wasn't impressed with the dialog but it doesn't take away fromthe movie enough to be upsetting. As the movie progresses so does Haleyas he seems to come into his own. The last 30min. of the movie you cansee a subtle shift in his behavior and comfortability that really sellsthe freddy image.
User: JAlexander3030Added: 30 April 2010
Vote: 9
Haley is Freddy;s Heath Ledger!
The movie was amazing in the sense that it had it's own vision on whoFreddy was. The 84 film was great but Kruger was a little campier thanI would like; This Freddy is a creep and in the end you really routeagainst him. Simply put: What Jackie Earl Haley is to Freddy is whatHeath Ledger is to the Joker! QUITE FRANKLY I THINK THAT PEOPLE SHOULDSTOP LIVING IN THE 80's AND TAKE THIS MOVIE FOR WHAT IT IS. I love theoriginal but if these came out at the same time with the same effects,the 2010 wins by a landslide! I really think that people who grew upwatching the original have a really bias opinion going into this movie.If you just accept that Robert Englund is almost 70 years old and thatit's a REMAKE!
User: dr-gonzo12Added: 30 April 2010
Vote: 9
Just gonna say, Either you love it or hate it.
in my opinion some of the performance's were great first of all jackieearl haley had to fill some pretty big shoes and he did a great job, asfor Nancy she was nothing like she was in the original, and the otherswell descent but anyways i liked the idea of how they made it seem thathe was killed for no reason and you're not sure if hes innocent or notbut bottom line is they had visually great effects great murder scenesbut the plot was so off compared to the original. i rated this a 7 outof ten because i grew up on Freddy and no matter how hard they could oftried it would not be a masterpiece like the original but they did do agreat job for a more modern crowd i dislike Michael bay having anythingto do with all of these great horror icons but i definitely think its amovie worth watching more than one time.And for all the haters outthere try to open your mind a little bit.
User: revgutteratAdded: 30 April 2010
Vote: 8
Not your cute and cuddly Freddy.
For a remake I think they did a fantastic job on this movie. Eventhough it isn't the most original plot ever conceived, the content,effects, and gore more than make up for the lack of originality. Freddydoes look more like a burn victim and even though he still has a senseof humor they have up played the negative aspects of his character (hisattitude toward young children... the teenage murders are why we lovedhim in the first place) which makes it harder to root for him. Some ofthe people at the show thought this ruined the Freddy character but Ibelieved it gave him a much more savage edge that his cute and cuddlycounterpart lacked. Don't get me wrong, Englund put his heart and soulinto Freddy and has flavored the franchise since 1984 but Haley puts ina very respectable performance for a character that we are veryfamiliar with. It appears that more concentrated energy was put intoset design, which was beautiful, than original kills, which were savagebut mostly homage to movies throughout the original series. Our newFreddy did add some new flavor to some of our old favorites but fans,and especially fanatics, of the old school will spot many nods to theold films. Finally, even though latex and buckets of Karo are myfavorite mode of delivery, the updated CGI gore was extremely well doneand didn't have that plastic edge that tends to ruin these types ofmovies. Horror fans both old school and new school should drop whateverthey are doing and go see this film. Freddy fanatics, even though theyhave taken Freddy away from us Haley carries the torch with honor andwe should judge him on his own merits, not on a "he's ruining RobertEnglund's character" basis. Robert Englund, we doff our fedora's inrespect, the king is dead, long live the king.
User: tyweldon24Added: 1 May 2010
Vote: 8
Finally a scary movie that doesn't suck!!
Take it form a real Freddy fan. I knew not to trust the reviews beforegoing to this movie. Hopefully whoever is reading this will ignore themtoo and go see it for yourself. Remaking a classic like this, you canexpect to get all the negative reviews. How can anyone live up toRobert Englund? You can't, he's Freddy. I was born in 1980 and grew upwatching all the Nightmare on Elm Street's multiple times. It was myfavorite horror movie. When I heard about the remake I was excited butstill worried that they wouldn't do a good job and it would be the endof the franchise. I'm not worried now, the movie was great. At the endof the movie the whole theater was cheering. The only thing thatworries me now is that people listen to these reviews from others whoalready go into the theater with the mindset of how does this comparewith the original. Lets just say there was never an original and youjust saw Freddy for the first time; this movie blows out any horrorfilm in years by far. As much as I love scary movie, I dread seeingthem because of the continual disappointment. This remake delivers.Listen people, go for yourself. If it's your a true horror fan, youwon't be disappointed.
User: Parker ChapmanAdded: 30 April 2010
Vote: 5
New Nightmare was Great Success
I was very pleased with the film and very shocked that it was done sowell. I went to the midnight premier and was on the edge of my seat thewhole time. I liked the overall pace of the movie. It was very fast,which gave the audience no time to relax. I thought the plot stayedtrue to the original and was not butchured or ruined in any way.Nightmare on ELm Street was by far the best remake of the classicslashers so far. I enjoyed Haley's take on classic villain Freddy. Hedidn't try and copy Robert Englund's Freddy which i thought was smart.Overall Nightmare on Elm Street was fun, scary, and a must see forclassic horror fans.
User: tbrocker5Added: 1 May 2010
Vote: 5
Not just another remake
Let me start by saying that when I first heard about this film I wasimmediately frightened...about having to sit through another ridiculousand over-the-top remake that is. However, certain details perked myinterest back up to the point that I did give my arm to go see the filmon opening day. After reading some of the more pessimistic reviews onthe remake before I went, I again became a little uneasy about what toexpect; however, I still went into the theater with my expectationsup...though not high. And as one can tell by my rating the remake didnot let me down. This was not just another remake.
First off: Freddy. This was the aspect I was undoubtedly most worriedabout. I felt that if Haley could pull off a good Freddy, then the filmwould be worth seeing. Ladies and gentleman it is worth seeing. Haleykeeps up the character's humor well and in my opinion is the scariestFreddy since the original; he might even be more frightening than theoriginal. His "scare factor" is aided by the fact that the story goes alot more in depth about his origins which was probably my favorite partof the film. Was he as charming and witty as Englund's character? No,and the movie no doubt would have been better had Englund been able toreprise his role. HOWEVER, Haley definitely does a fantastic job.Haley's Freddy is darker and meatier, hence his awesome voice, andgives the audience a great reason to fear him.
The cast: Unlike the remake of Friday the 13th and other horror filmsof today, the cast was clearly not chosen based upon their looks. Thesekids definitely sold me on all their roles, especially Quentin who wasby far my favorite character next to Freddy. Nancy was a little lesscomplex than I would have liked to have seen but is still notable inthis section.
The plot: Definitely the only part of this film that was lacking. Idon't believe that it was the actual events that caused this. The deathscenes, though at times a little uncreative, were well executed (punintended) and the development of Freddy's character was excellent. Ithink it was the underlying story that was showing a lack of color. Iremember in the theater thinking that things were going a little toofast in the beginning and that they could have taken their time morewith the development of the other characters. The movie is alsoslightly shallow until Quentin and Nancy start to unravel why theseevents are happening to them. However, once the plot starts rolling Iwas definitely hopping in to enjoy the ride. The entire second half ofthe movie is great and definitely makes up for what was lacking in thefirst half.
As I'm sure you've noticed, some people aren't as optimistic with thisremake because they don't think it even touched the original. But Ithink that these people are missing something...this is a differentmovie and it possesses its own creativity. Freddy is not the exactsame, the characters are not the same, and the plot is different.However, I think what they did with this movie was definitely a greatnew take on the series and by far better than most of the sequels tothe original. So when you go to see this film, which I recommend youdo, keep this question in the back of your head: Can they do much worsethan the second Nightmare?
Added: 1 May 2010
Vote: 5
Closest thing to an 80's horror since....Um The 80s!
They really hit it out the park with this remake. Admittedly I am aslasher FREAK! However the remakes have been very disappointing thusfar with the first Texas Chainsaw Massacre being a slight exception.Enough of that though because they don't even belong in the sameconversation with what Bayer & the cast of this movie did! It seemedlike I was in a time warp & I finally got to go back to the early 80'sand see Freddy on the big screen. He was a sort of different Freddy,Yes but he had all the same torturous tricks for the kids and evenadded some demented new tricks & lines of his own. Robert Englund is &will always be a horror master but Jackie Earl Haley is showing he haslegs to carry the new series of Nightmare movies with his own viletwist. Kyle Gallner in the lead male role & Rooney Mara as the "new"Nancy were both great I felt in bringing the seriousness of thesituation out without revealing too much playing their roles toperfection. I don't know how they can follow this one up or if they canbut I hope they give it a shot & don't change much.
User: Pumpkin_ManAdded: 1 May 2010
Vote: 5
A Great Remake to a Great Classic!!!
I absolutely loved this movie. It was everything I expected and more.Freddy Krueger is back with a vengeance and scarier than ever for a newgeneration. Jackie Earle Haley pulled an amazing performance as Freddy.I love his new look and his deep creepy voice. I literally had chillsduring a few scenes. The storyline is quite different than theoriginal, but still gave a few homages to the 1984 classic. Theteenagers of Elm Street are beginning to have grotesque nightmares of aburnt man, and start dying in their sleep. Nancy Holbrook and QuentinSmith try to figure out why Freddy is after them, and takes mattersinto their own hands. Without having sleep for three days, they beginto dream while they are awake, and can't tell what's reality or not. Ihighly recommend A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET!!!
User: tleppo316Added: 2 May 2010
Vote: 5
Who wants a Robert Englund with a walker
Christ I will do another review but this is for the people that are soin hate of it because Robert Englund wasn't in it. Holy hell what doyou expect him to do, be Freddy with a cane. HA try getting a chasescene out of that. Give it up cause Englund himself wasn't trying to bein the movie, he said it himself he is too old to do it. Cry cry cry isall critics do just to get heard by someone like me who thinks I justwasted my time but happened to still read it anyhow. Okay the old Nancywow she starred on what show back in the day. Just the 10 of us, wowsome awesome show that was. You complain about actors sucking , storylines blowing, blah blah blah. Why don't you get out there and make amovie then worth seeing so I can go ahead and bad mouth it. Big dealMichael Bay was somewhat producing this movie, he is making millionswhile you are on your couch wishing you were making anything at all.Great movie, will see it again. There will an actual review from meafter I relax from having a headache from all the non sense negativereviews people are leaving about a horror movie they expected themakers of Avatar to create.
User: major032Added: 2 May 2010
Vote: 4
A great horror movie
Are you people stupid or something...This is a joke some of thesereviews..Freddy was a molester...and unlike the other older Freddymovies they didn't shy away from that fact..the simple boo factor inhorror movies doesn't just cut it anymore..this movie isn't supposed tobe fun, its suppose to scare the crap out of you..This movie was deadon about everything..the story was great...Please if you are a fan ofFreddy Kruger..you must see this movie..Michael Bay did a masterful jobon this movie, don't be discouraged by some of these stupid reviews byother people,i just saw this movie in theater's and i looked around theplace about 2/3's threw the movie and you know what i saw..i saw peoplesucked into this movie..thats what you want to see in a movie thatswhat makes a movie great...Freddy is back. This is by far the bestremake i have ever seen in terms of the big 3 horror icons- FreddyKrueger, Jason, and Michael myers..I would really like to know how theycan justify making myers in the new movies a giant steroid freak whenhe was a little fat kid growing up..stupid..anyways this movie wasgreat..a must see.
User: chrismsawinAdded: 30 April 2010
Vote: 13
Better than expected
This remake rests on the shoulders of Haley's portrayal of Freddy. Ifdie hard horror fans can get past constantly comparing him to Englund,then they'll realize that Haley doesn't do a bad job. His Rorschachvoice was actually a great choice for the role as it seemed toreverberate off the walls of the theater throughout the entire film.His stalking methods were a bit different than expected. Haley's Freddydoesn't talk as much as Englund's and seems to be off-screen just asoften as he is on. The wisecracking has been toned way down, as well,but he does manage to squeeze in, "How's this for a wet dream?" Haley'sversion of Freddy is angry. He is enraged at the fact that these kidssquealed on him and he wants them to pay, but wants to dish out hisrevenge in a way that lets him have fun at the same time. His bodylanguage speaks volumes, too. His bladed fingers itch in anticipationof the kill. In fact, it seems like his fingers talk more than he does.The realistic burn victim route with the make-up seems like it's justas much a blessing as it is a curse. Freddy's eyes look really weird.They're too small and beady. He looks like kind of like a monkey whenyou do catch a full glimpse of his face. That's a shame, too. Sinceeverything else looks pretty fantastic.
The storyline seems to basically follow the same path as the originalfilm, but it probably should have skipped some of the new detours itmakes along the way. Kris dreams of herself as a child with bloody clawmarks across her torso and then finds the same dress with four gashesin her attic, but she doesn't have any scars from this rather severeinjury she obtained when she was five? Even if the explanation was shehad some sort of cosmetic surgery, wouldn't that be just as traumaticfor a child? The CG version of the scene where we see Freddy coming outof the wall in the remake is probably the weakest in the entire film.The scene in the original is one of its most memorable visuals. In theremake, it's botched thanks to crummy CG. Even in comparison to therest of the CG in the film, it doesn't measure up. It's the one scenethat I wasn't able to look past. However, the micro naps idea is trulyfantastic for the film. That was one thing I highly approved of goinginto it. The way that is pulled off is one of the highlights of theremake. It's one of those ideas that fits so perfectly, you'resurprised it wasn't in the original film. Fred Krueger's background iswhere the film really goes into its own territory though. Fred was agardener who lived in the basement of Badham Pre-School and thechildren were his life. He apparently took them to his "cave" wherethey emerged with scratches on their bodies. The parents of Elm Streetdon't bother trying to inform the police. They just burn Krueger aliveas retribution to what he did to their children. While the originalfranchise never really came right out and said that Freddy was a childmolester, it always strongly hinted at it. The remake seems tobasically come right out and say that he is one without actually sayingit. The evidence they find in his "cave" solidifies that fact. Maybethey felt like they needed to do that since this is such a "serious"version of Freddy...? Certain things just don't add up in the long run.Quentin and Nancy are driving in a car at one point and Quentin has amicro nap where he sees Freddy in front of the car. He swerves out ofthe way to avoid hitting him and winds up in this boggy marsh off theside of the road. The question is WHY would you swerve out of the wayof a man who was trying to kill you?
The kills seem to get more gruesome as the film goes on. It's a niceroute to go, really. The last kill of the film is probably the oneyou'll remember most. I wasn't too incredibly attached to Nancy in theoriginal film, but Rooney Mara's version was really boring. You don'tcare about what happens to her at all. You're more interested in whathappens to her friends. She's an art student that can't sleep and isconnected to Freddy somehow. That's pretty much all that's revealed.Why should we care that she may die?
A Nightmare on Elm Street certainly has its misfires when it comes tospecial effects and its storyline, but the problems it has aren'treally any different than the problems most modern day horror movieshave. At least the acting wasn't terrible like in an 80s slasher andthe CG effects aren't incredibly outdated or anything. The film wasdesigned to appeal to the demographic going to movie theaters to see ahorror movie in 2010 and it seems to do that very well. Sure, itprobably doesn't live up to the original film, but not many remakes do.If people see this without seeing the original film first, they'llprobably love the remake. For original Freddy fans though, it'llprobably come down to Haley's portrayal of Freddy. If you can see thefilm without any expectations or with finally accepting the fact thatRobert Englund is no longer Freddy, it actually isn't quite as terribleas you may have originally thought. Strangely enough, it's evenentertaining at times. Go figure.
Added: 30 April 2010
Vote: 9
A Cold, Dark Remake in the Warmth of a Gaudy Sweater
Unlike most reviewers, I prefer to judge every movie on its own merits.
The opening credits, which could've been mistaken for a music video,lead quickly into the first kill: a brutal one that tickled my horrorbone but also annoyed me with its jump-cuts and shaky-cam editing.Unfortunately this "action by camera shaking" technique crops up a fewmore times throughout the movie.
The main characters are average teens in an average town, sothankfully, no time is wasted on pointless character development andsetting meditation. As it should be, the focus is always on Freddy,whose afterlife appearance is wonderfully gruesome as he stalks adreamland that melds seamlessly with reality to create interestingtransitions. The suspense created by these transitions, however, isquickly destroyed by overt musical cues.
The mystery of Freddy's past was a great angle and ultimately served todarken an already very dark tone set by the brutality of the preceding.
Overall, the acting is quite good, although Mara's sleep-deprived Nancydoes occasionally border on woodenness.
The only head-scratcher was the fate of the Asian blogger whose head isseemingly thrust into the camera. If that video was his last, whoposted it?
