Friday the 13th

It's Friday the 13th so it's only appropriate that I post a Jason Voorhees photo on my blog...

Still a Freddy girl, sorry.

Happy Friday the 13th/Irrelevant Post Friday/Follow Friday on Twitter.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

The remake of the Wes Craven classic of the same name follows Nancy and Quintin, two sleep deprived teenagers who are being haunted by a man in their dreams. The man, dressed in a dirty Christmas sweater, burnt head to toe, and downing a glove with knives for fingernails, is killing off Nancy and Quintin's friends in their dreams. Now as the two of them struggle to stay awake in what are called (or I believe) micro-dreams they try to figure out what he wants, knowing there's a larger connection to all of this. The look and feel to this is modern horror but I don't know it just doesn't work. Warning, some spoiler alerts.

The film doesn't go with out effort, the opening title sequence is a nice visual piece and new concepts to the series add an interesting touch, like the micro-dreams, or as I said in the first paragraph I believe that's what they called them. In all honesty I had a hard time following the dialog as it was less than intelligent at times. After the first forty five minutes I consciously made an effort to take in only about forty five percent of what people were saying to each other as it was just unrealistic and quite frankly stupid. Also another thing that added a different dynamic was that the current victims were the previous victims. However; that also serves as a down point for the film, they showcase the child molester element quite a bit, and when I mean that I mean when Nancy says: "Fuck you!" Freddy replies: "That sounds like fun." It's a little bit tough to take in. It didn't find a balance between casual and disturbing, at points in the film like when the kids found out they were molested as children from their parents (who also disclosed it in such a bizarre way) they had basically no reaction. But then there's a scene where Freddy comes close to raping Nancy.

Acting is decently awful. I couldn't stand Katie Cassidy and I was counting off the minutes until Freddy killed her, she also looked twenty five not seventeen. Kellan Lutz also got it pretty earlier as well and I was thankful for that. Roony Mara was fairly awful, I understand that Nancy is suppose to be a tortured misfit teen in this but reading all your lines in monotone doesn't help the audience like you. Her character doesn't compare with old Nancy and you can understand why they have another character in the end helping her try and kill Freddy. It isn't believable that she can do it on her own. I like Kyle Gallner from Jennifer's Body and A Haunting In Connecticut, so I know he can act, and while I'm glad he was there to counter Mara's acting he was also a little less than impressionable. Now Jackie Earle Harley is probably the only person I can see playing Freddy and he did alright, I guess. It's not as iconic as Robert England's but he's creepy, they made him look like a real burnt victim which did make it more horrifying and hard to look at. How he acted was a little odd but I don't know, it could have been worse.

The film would have gotten a solid two stars (out of five)  from me for the new ideas and the added creepiness of Freddy but the last ten seconds were so awful that it pushed it into the category that this is just another really shitty remake. They try to replicate the iconic scenes and it's obvious that they were hesitant about it, knowing that copying it exactly or dis-including it would piss off fans. But that dilemma speaks for itself; you can't do either without pissing people off so why bother remaking this? This just doesn't work, the undying bogeyman of the seventies and eighties who spawns sequels into the nineties doesn't work in the new millennium (unfortunately). I actually went to the theater (rare for me) and saw Scream 4, which isn't exactly scary but was a great movie as it did what the first did, paid homage to the genre while parodying it. You're wondering what relevance this has well I'm just saying Craven understands how horror has moved from the decades, current Hollywood producers don't. Freddy belongs in the eighties, this generation should stick to what it knows, torture porn and Facebook killers. Or maybe I'm asking to much here but...I don't know...how but something new and creative we've never seen.

Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy (2010)

Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy is a two part documentary series that does an in depth look into the making of all eight A Nightmare on Elm Street films. Spanning four hours (yes, it's painlessly long), the documentary collects interviews from original cast members, special fx and make up artists, and of course Robert Shaye, the guy who produced all eight films. Narrated with a fitting tone by original Freddy Krueger survivor Heather Langenkamp, between the extensive discussion time allotted and the equally lengthy bonus features which cover the unseen interviews Never Sleep Again leaves no questions unanswered.

The film has a cathartic honesty that's unanticipated, all films alike cast and crew admits to flaws and failures of their film(s), and a rectitude of explanation that's staggering at the least. They're not limited either, from The Kung Fu budget cut in The Dream Master to the complicated creative relationship between Robert Shaye and Wes Craven. Whether being Nightmare one or Nightmare six each film gets a fair share of screen time, which is all really done in respects to the fans of the film who lifted the franchise off the ground and stuck through it, even after the series lost its horror contour to the parody of memorabilia and classic lines. But what really makes this documentary luring, at least to my taste anyways, is the use of special effects and how it progressed through the ages. The documentary in itself is almost a brief side documentary on how Hollywood moved through the decade with the technology. And even an idea at what it takes to make a movie on an independent budget.

The interviews seem illimitable by the breadth of people involved. The previous cast members that directors Daniel Farrands and Andrew Kasch accumulated is incredulous, how they found Mark Patton, Jesse from Freddy's Revenge, is a testament in itself. As fans we don't get the 'big stars' such as Johnny Depp or Particia Arquette, but rather the big stars of the series like our heroines who took to Freddy more than once, Heather Langenkamp and Lisa Wilcox. And basically every victim in between. There's the usually disregarded behind the scenes crew who are as much apart of the series as Wes Craven is. They give you insight into the makeup process that it took to create the iconic look of Freddy and the imaginative deaths and the special effects that went into those. Wes Craven's commentary outside of his own work is not bitter, per say, but rather at a loss for the films that followed, save aside for a nice comment toward Renny Harlin. I basically enjoyed about everyone's opinions and insight into the films with the exception of Jack Sholder, as his came off rather arrogant.

The film makes room for a lot of humorous parts to pair with the light hearted fan base, the fangirl inside of me got really excited when I saw that Freddy Krueger and Jason Mewes actually existed in a world together. They even go into the pop culture gags that materialized after Nightmare three and four, where things like the Freddy doll and pajamas became available (as one interviewee ironically points out that Freddy originally was a child molester, and now you can wear him to bed). Band Dokken even stops in for a discussion on how their contribution to Dream Warriors was one of the first music videos available on VHS. At the end of the documentary as homage to the series and the Elm Street junkies each actor quotes their most memorable line during the credits. I mentioned this in the first Nightmare review but Never Sleep Again isn't just a documentary for the fans, even if you've only seen one out of the eight films in the franchise there's something to be savored here. I loved this documentary, as if you couldn't tell, and one that I'd watch again. I recommend to any fan of the genre, of the series, or just of film making in general. 



It's over. This proved to be rather draining task and I did not anticipate that watching all eight Nightmare films in a row would mentally wear me out, despite spacing them on a weekly basis (with the exception of Freddy vs. Jason). An oddly interesting fact the films that I had seen before I decided to watch them all (one, three, seven and eight) were the only four I liked. If I were to do it again, with another series of films, I'd do it every other week just to give myself a break from the excessive use of words (I'm dreadfully tired of typing the words 'Freddy' and 'Elm Street' and 'Imaginative') but I don't know if I could do it again, to be honest. I clearly have some masochistic qualities in film watching as I decided to watch all of the Hellraiser films; however I won't be writing reviews for that. I'm currently seven films in and most I don't have much of an opinion on. My recommendation for the series, film one through eight, is watch it. The films themselves hold reams of originality being eminent from that slasher outline, and hate or love them they are a prominent chapter in horror/film history.

Freddy Vs Jason (2003)

I started a new job today (that I already dislike) and also had to go to my second job so the review is not...in pristine condition. See I just used the word pristine. Anyways I apologize ahead of time for the deficient writing and pallid word use but I also figure that since it's Freddy Vs Jason there's no real need for a professional tone, to mimic the nature of the film of course.

Four years of peace have reigned on Elm Street after Freddy's daughter killed him for good. But Freddy's not ready to sleep just yet and begins to haunt the nightmares of Jason Voorhees, a serial killer who resides at Camp Crystal Lake, killing horny adolescent camp counselors, no less. Freddy convinces Jason to travel to Elm Street and murder the teens there to awaken the fear of Freddy, resurrecting him officially. But Jason starts to get knife happy early on in the film, switching the battle from horror-movie-rule-breaking-teenagers, to a fight between the two notorious slashers. There's this commercial where a dad is sticking his son's feet in plaster and the mom walks in and asks what they're doing. He says that they're making socks that fit to their feet because no other socks will. The mom replies simply "That's really stupid." That's how I feel about Freddy Vs Jason, but in a good way.

I'm potentially going to abuse the word 'camp' in this review as it sums up the majority of the film, also because this is part of the Never Sleep Again reviews I'm going to address mostly Freddy's side of the film, as I don't know too much about Jason and can't speak for his series as a whole. It's rather amusing that out of all eight films the most recent one is the campiest of them all. Ronny Yu as a director is always intriguing but as he mentions he intends not to take the horror too seriously, which could translate in to absolute lack of sobriety, as this film reeks of drunken fun. Freddy Vs Jason is so fatuous that it reserves rights with The Evil Dead and Dead Alive horror archive (alright, maybe not THAT funny). In laughter and in gore; excessively bloody, especially in the end, the final scene between our two slashers is drenched in it. A lot of it is hidden in the dark lighting of the film (presuming to get away with an R rating) which tones the violence down some. There's a fresh variety in the kills as Jason takes his machete to them at different angles, and Freddy uses his claws on the few victims he's allotted.

The acting is so bad its campy bad and Brendan Fletcher isn't helping. But as the ostentatious use of blood it's fitting for the film and the overall lack of purpose. All the teens are not good and play it way over the top, the only one I'd account for because she had a good performance or at the least tried to make it more was Katherine Isabelle. Freddy as a character is a bit lost in the script, they did away with most of his clever one-liners and he's not as prominent as the side story of Lori and Will (gag), but Robert England plays him as smoothly as ever, no bumps or scratches from age or shift in intent (this film isn't as imaginative as the previous Elm Street films). The writers don't take away from Freddy, however, by throwing him straight into a slasher film, in all respects, but they continue to add a cunning nature to him, especially when him and Jason are fighting and he continuously finds objects to impale Jason with.

Freddy Vs Jason delivers what the subtext of its title promises, two slashers in an epic battle, with a dozen or so teenagers getting slashed along the way. Freddy's makeup is as it was in the 80's but done on a more professional budget, but there's still that pizza face prosthetic under the gleams of lighting. The film is partially consistent with the Elm Street stories but has to sacrifice its style some to let the Friday the 13th tone through. The film is not an adept horror film, don't take it as one.

Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994)

This is Wes Craven's way of saying 'There, I fixed it. Don't touch, just leave it alone.' New Nightmare is a very different departure from the rest of the series, it's set in Hollywood where the tenth anniversary of the original Nightmare on Elm Street movie is approaching. Wes Craven is far from escaping the fame of the first film though as now after six films a demon in the form of Freddy is haunting him, coercing him to write a new script. Craven approaches Heather Langenkamp to revise her role as Nancy, now a wife and mother Heather is apprehensive as she prefers her TV career to her horror legacy, especially in the case of her son. However when Heather's husband dies and she realizes that someone is targeting her son Dylan, Heather has to revert into the dream-scape yet again to stop Freddy.

The seventh installment has, as do they all, the goods and the bad. Goods are this one has some actual thought behind it, as Wes Craven has tried to do with several of his films, but not just make it horror but connect it to real life. This is the predecessor to Scream, the characters within the movie recognize the Elm Street movies as films and Robert England as Freddy. There's parallels to Hansel and Gredel as well as a study of the connection between children and the horror industry today, or rather to how it was in the 90's. In this Craven produces a new look for Freddy that does not quite go with his original story, but it makes sense seeing how Freddy is more of an entity in this than an actual character. It does make for a more horrifying face though, which in addition to a number of other things revamps Freddy as scary. Particularly there's a horror reminescent of the fear caused in the first film, not being killed in your dreams but rather being pulled in to your own bed. Is that...yes...Freddy is actually using his claws! Oh my God what a concept. As my past reviews have hopefully let on that I have found a particular annoyance with that, but this time no he signs his signature on everything.

Craven does the duo role of writing and directing, he plays around with the fact to fiction in the screenplay, especially with the characters. Heather Langenkamp, who suffered a terrifying stalker incident in real life is reliving the fear as Freddy calls her house phone, harassing her and her son. Langenkamp is really quite good at playing herself, which along with other types of acting, such as playing dumb, gets underestimated and overlooked as easy. Robert England's spin is that he's a bit of a whore for the attention of the pop culture fandom, and he paints! England has fun with the depiction of the character and of course teases the viewer by having creepy moments, where you question if he's behind the murders. John Saxon comes back in a larger role (yay!) and Fran Bennett has a very memorable moment in her small scene. Other Nightmare characters like Lyn Shaye come in for cameos as well as Craven himself and Boy Shaye, the man behind all the films.

The downside is it's not a film for the hardcore fans. The ones who love Freddy as the pop culture icon he is and not so much of his terror or Craven's ability to write might not like the film as its not like the first six. The film isn't great, and it has had no where near the impact Scream had, but its not bad and unique. Don't go out of your way to watch it but if it happens to be on TV, click on it and check it out.

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991)

WARNING: May contain some spoilers

After The Dream Child didn't live up to its two predecessors they went ahead and decided that introducing new characters would be the best route for the series. In Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare Freddy is aspiring to get out of Elm Street as a decade and a half (this film is set in 1999) of killing in Springfield has become tiresome, that and he's killed just about everyone under the age of eighteen. Chasing after the last teen proves to be a fail as John Doe escapes and ends up at a shelter for troubled youth. Dr. Maggie Burroughs is overseeing his case and in attempts to cure his amnesia wants to take him back to the town where he barely got away with his life. Meanwhile three other teens from the shelter escape only to end up in Springfield where they meet up with Dr. Burroughs and John Doe. The child absent town has left adults wandering, looking for meaning, leaving John Doe and Maggie free to uncover the identity of the former and find out who this mysterious Freddy Krueger is. The point of this film is to tie up lose ends, satisfy demanding fans, and make a profit off the now iconic Freddy.

In the documentary they mentioned that because this was the last one they just went ahead and self destructed, and that's a fair summary of the film. The back story of Freddy's child came out of nowhere, like literally nowhere. Not that it's impossible for a child killer to have a child but in context to Freddy's reasoning for existence it makes little sense as to why he loved his daughter but was more intent on killing the Elm Street teens than finding her, especially since she's thirty years old. The film tries far too hard to be comedic, having Roseanne Bar and Tom Arnold in it for cameos. The one liners...I'm sorry but just because you throw 'bitch' at the end of every small phrase (i.e. Kung Fu, bitch), does not make it funny. "Welcome to Prime Time, Bitch" was a classic line from the third film and they've managed to abuse its power in every film since. The deaths in this one are like the others they relate to the individual victim but are not scary, the only one I found upsetting was the kid with the hearing aid. The ending is pretty dismal, the 3D add on not really bringing too much to the series.

Lisa Zane plays the doctor and daughter to Freddy, she was alright having the adult role in the film so her acting shines above the teens. Breckin Mayer is in the film, he's a known face but not a household name (he was an 90's teen actor who never got that big). Robert England flows with the Freddy change, he's not formidable but he's as gleeful and witty as ever. I was excited to see Alice Cooper as Freddy's step-father but it was a brief 10 seconds and I noticed that they also managed to rip off Stephen King's The Shinning by using the phrase "Take Your Medicine", while crushing my dreams. There's more plot in this one than the previous film, which was completely absent of one. Despite that though the film was a lot worse than warranted, especially since Rachel Talalay was the director. She started out as the Assistant Production Manager on the first film and worked her way up to director. She has a fairly lengthy list of films to her directorial career but this is her first film so its really not bad. In all honesty the biggest fault in the film is the writing, it's too silly to be commended as a horror script, it's clearly a comedy. However, unlike nightmare five Rachel went in with intent to be ridiculous, so it's not quite the same fault as in the fifth when it falls on its face.

I'd like to point out that the tagline inaccurately presaged the film, on both accounts. This is not the last nor is it the best. Freddy's makeup has been loosing its quality for a few films now, looking less like a burn victim and more like a makeup school's first prosthetic project. I'm not sure what else to say other than that it seems like little effort was put into this, almost like The Blair Witch Project the publicity was more interesting than the film (Freddy had a funeral). This was the only film out of the franchise that I wanted to turn off. It's not like it was horrendously bad, of course not. Despite an excess of one liners, bad acting, and a ridiculous plot this is not the worst film I've seen, far from actually. My verdict is that if your not out to watch all the nightmare films than this one is an easy miss.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989)

Before I start this week's Nightmare review I like to point out that I've made my first clickable side image thing! I'm quite proud at my half ass photoshop skills as it's now more easier than ever (as if the 7 different tags I have isn't) to locate the reviews. I've also decided that it really wouldn't be complete if I didn't fully do the whole eight films so Freddy Vs. Jason will happen. I may even throw in a review of the documentary, who knows. The other news that basically made me fall off my chair...I have my first follower! I'm beyond appreciative to you that I'm literally at a loss for words, but thank you. And finally I've been tampering with the blog to make it look good. I'm not doing to great so any feedback (if anyone is there) would be helpful.

What is there to say about A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child? Not much I suppose as the film was a bit of a let down. The opening scene is Alice and Dan, from the fourth film, having sex before their graduation. Generally all seems well for our two survivors, new friends, new life, and a promising relationship, until Dan dies that is and Alice finds out briefly afterwards that she is pregnant. Freddy is back again and as a side project to his mundane teen killings he's contriving a more permanent body as he enters through the mind of Alice's sleeping unborn baby. Dealing with the stress of Freddy coming back, her friend's dying all over the place again, and being pregnant Alice is struggling to fight off whats to come. Not all is at fault though, Alice has help from an unlikely entity, Amanda Krueger, Freddy's mother.

If you haven't guessed by my inconsistent posting record that I watched these films awhile ago. Most I wrote down thoughts after seeing so my reviews have been based on those brief commentaries but this is one where I forgot to write a few sentences of the review down as an outline, so I'm purely going off from memory and tidbits of info on IMDB. As blury as some may be I do remember a distinct feeling of having my time being wasted while watching the film. I was not pulled in because there was no plot. Really, it's aimless wandering for the most part, and typically I don't mind shallow almost absent plots but having one with watery characters was just to much of a miss to be a good film. The deaths continue to be creatively concieved but non are so much scary as just weird (Greta's death anyone?). The horror in this I'd say is in the scene where they show the attack on Amanda Krueger, its not graphic as it doesn't show the rape but watching Freddy's future maniac father (England without makeup) stalk through the crowd is pretty effective in capturing that random horror to the whole scenario. Also, the film plays with that hopeless Rosemary Baby element, what's growing inside of you is killing you, and it works out proactively towards the film.

This is where I regret watching the documentary before the films as I remember the actors mentioning that that director was never in one place as he had to address other issues on set, leaving the actors to direct themselves. It shows, on both accounts, in acting Laurie Wilcox returns as Alice and she's comfortable enough in her part where she's convincing, but it still carries an peculiar note to it as it did in the last film. Alice has a new black friend and as the actress mentions in the documentary, she lives! That's The Dream Child for ya, breaking stereotypes since 1989. Let's give it up to Super Freddy actor Michael Bailey Smith for not only tacking the role of Freddy but being brave enough to show his ass on film (yes that is not Dan's ass in the opening scene, I hate to disappoint you).

A Nightmare on Elm Street 5 is one of those films where no one stopped to notice how bad things were. It may have helped if they nixed the the Elm Street teen killings and drove the story more towards the rebirth of Freddy and expanded more on his roots. I don't hate the film but I'd say a low dislike is fair enough. I didn't dislike Dream Master but maybe the slasher plot line that follows in the next two films drowns my neutral viewing experience a bit. Freddy's one liners become glaringly annoying at this point and his makeup is in all it's pizza face glory. I feel like my review would have a lot more positive notes if I had written after watching the film cause all I can recall is the negative, so in truth maybe it's not best to take my advice on the review this week. Maybe the only honest statement I can tell you is that I did feel like I wasted a good movie experience after watching it, all missing plots and bad directing aside.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988)

I am the wizard master! Oh wait wrong Nightmare. A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master starts with our previous heroine Kristen having nightmares again, although Freddy is DEAD and Kincaid and Joey try to convince her otherwise she is bothered by the thought that he might be back. By a hellish chain of events Freddy is resurrected and kills Kristen, but not before Kristen pulls Alice, a friend of her's from school, into the dream and gives her power over to her. From there it becomes the contrived plot line of Alice and her friends trying to stay awake and live through Freddy's nightmares. Nightmare on Elm Street 4 proves to not be as good as its predecessor but not awful all around.

The film is quite visually pretty, my favorite being the water bed scene that illuminates green's in blues in a darkly lit room. The death's in this one don't register as anything special in my eyes, and maybe it's just a pet peeve of mine but what's the point of Freddy's claws if he isn't going to kill anybody with them? In truth the best, more creative I should rather say, is Freddy's death, which I loved! In the reviews for the Nightmare remake I noticed that a lot of individuals were criticizing the fact that Freddy didn't toy with his victims before killing them, which I have to agree would annoy me too since it's one of my favorite things about Freddy. But this film seemed to fall victim to the same fault, he toyed with two teens, Alice and Kristen but offed the others without second thought. Am I being picky? Maybe.

Its saddening that Patricia Arquette did not come back for this one, her replacement is deficient, to say the least. Her scream sounds more like her having an orgasm rather than her burning in a pit of fire, every line out her mouth is forced, and she just didn't really get the Kristen character. I liked Alice's transformation, a nice layer to the movie that worked out subtly enough. As for the others well Alice has a lot of friends, who die of course, all of which are played by eager young adults wanting to be in a movie, but their names aren't memorable enough nor is their performances. Is it appropriate for me to gush over the same actor in 7 reviews straight? Probably not so I'll just say that it's Robert England playing Freddy Krueger.

I didn't hate the film, that's a bit drastic to say, but in a lot of ways it wasn't for me. I've observed that in the past three Nightmare's that Freddy's makeup is pretty weak, not really looking like burns. Maybe I'm just nit picking because the first one of is one of my favorites but who knows. This is also the film where the one liners become a small annoyance, nothing too excessive but you notice. As I was saying I don't hate the film, but the lack of blood and the shift in separating some of the mythology from the first film is enough to surpass good direction and a visually satisfying film.

A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3: Dream Warriors (1987)

Before the Never Sleep Again mission the third film in the series, and coined as the fan favorite, is one I've previously seen before and as I recall, I very much enjoyed it. A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3 is set in a hospital for anxious teenagers, who unknowingly have something in common, they are the last of the Elm Street kids. The main character is Kristen, a newly admitted patient to the facility, her arrival brings on Freddy's killing spree within the ward and soon following her is an expert in the field, Nancy. Nancy, now a psychologist, struggles to help the teens while still remaining logical to her peers. But soon Nancy and Kristen learn that the days of helpless dreaming are over, as they are introduced to the dream powers they each posses inside of them.

Re-watching this I did have a mutual experience as of last time, I really liked the film for bring back Nancy, setting up the series's reputation of creativity, and giving Freddy witty dialog. The deaths in this one are really unique and amp the dream concept up in that they tend to the characters personally. My favorite was the marionette, it looked painful and puppet Freddy was adorable yet creepy. And of course I must mention the notorious TV death with spawned the pop icon Freddy, with his line; "Welcome to prime time, bitch". This also, in my opinion, has the best lines and the worst lines. The best going to Freddy and the worst to Taryan for "In my dreams I'm beautiful *cue swtichblades* and bad". And of course others in between. 

The teens are all likable and were convincing as friends. This is Patricia Arquette's first film and she's actually good in it. John Saxon comes back for a brief cameo, nuff said. In the first Nightmare film I enjoyed the fiestiness to Nancy's character, this time around Heather Langenkemp plays a much more relaxed Nancy, having settled into being adult, but of course when it comes to Freddy that raw fight she displays in the first film comes out. And....Robert England. The script was written by a collection of writers, the more noted ones being Frank Darabont and Wes Craven, both who I think largely contributed to the success of the film. Not that the other two are bad by any means, it's just to their name they have less horror film credit. Directing wise Chuck Russel has an interesting take on how the dreams appear, unlike that typical misty facade he uses open sets and the synthetic pizza face Freddy look to contrast in lighting and set design.

The third film in the Nightmare franchise is not as scary as the first but does a lot better as a sequel than the actually sequel did. The dream gifts bring out an inalienable competency in the films which opt for a more action based dream sequence than the typical running-from-the-boogeyman-slasher-build-up. This one may be the deciding factor in your interest in this franchise, if you like this one you'll probably want to keep watching. If you didn't, however, than I'd stop now because this is the high point in the series. Still if you're going to see any of them, this is the one to view.  

A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985)

A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge, returns to the the famous Elm Street house in the first one. Five years later a new teeanger, Jesse Walsh, has moved in with his family. Jesse, as so many, is struggling a bit with growing up, and has more issues now that Freddy Krueger is haunting him. Freddy is still angry about being one uped by Nancy, so in his attempts to solve his anger he decides to seek revenge, through Jesse. But have no fear, Jesse and his girlfriend Lisa find Nancy's diary, guiding them through the nightmares. I must say part 2 has flaws, to put it kindly. Between plot, character, and directing issues.

Manipulating the dream/reality complex proves to be to disorienting in this one as Jesse is in neither one nor the other. Freddy no longer is able to solely control the dreams of teenagers but as well as the physical elements around them. That first off breaks the dream barrier that was well constructed in the first film. And secondly, as I said before, it's hard to distinguish what's going on. A lot of Freddy's actions this time are not so much Freddy. He doesn't really toy with Jesse but rather uses him, He preforms a lot of Poltergeist tricks, i.e. setting the toaster oven on fire, making the birds go crazy (in truth the Walsh family has a good case for paranormal investigators). The ending is dull, the boiler scene leaves little to nothing to remember.

A rumor with this one is that the films contains gay subtext. I've heard those who see it and those who don't, in my opinion...yeah it's a little bit leaning that way. Jesse seems to be teetering on his sexuality bounds throughout the film. There's subtle clues (board game Probe in the closet anyone?) and there's the not so subtle clues, like Coach Schneider's death. But its not bad in anyway, in fact it gives more depth to a script that lacks any real meaning or connection. The Never Sleep Again documentary had interviews with the director and he mentioned not liking the first film, however, a lot of people DID like the first film. It seems more that he set out to make a quick fix horror film than anything that stems off Craven's first piece.

The second took a steep fall from the level the first one was on. It, in short, missed the point. A Nightmare on Elm Street is known for being an imaginative series, though I don't think that title got earned until the third film, this is still however lacking. I did like though that they managed to clear some confusion to the ending of the first film in this. It's not great, if anything watch it for Jesse's infamous man scream.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

After seeing the Never Sleep Again documentary around Halloween, which is a great documentary, for fans especially but really for anyone curious of film making and the early techniques with special effects, I became possessed with the thought of watching all seven Nightmare films (I decided to skip Freddy Vs Jason because I've seen it, and I'm just not in the mood to watch it again). I've seen a few before, but never the entire series. So I set out with the, surprisingly tedious, task of watching all seven films in chronological order.

To start at the beginning A Nightmare on Elm Street typically falls under the slasher film genre, though I'd argue that it doesn't truly earn that title until later in the franchise, the reason being that the film is a lot more imaginative in concept than say the Friday the 13th series, which is more of a full bodied slasher. The story starts out with Tina, a teenage girl who's having strange nightmares about a man, burnt from the head down, wearing a dirty green and red stripped sweater, a ragged hat, and a glove with knives for fingers. Tina becomes rattled by the dream when she feels there is something more to it than a typical night terror, which proves to be true one night when she dies in her dream and then dies in real life. From there it goes to her best friend, Nancy, as she tries to figure out who the man with the knives for fingernails is and what he wants, while ultimately trying to stay awake.

The film has a horror aspect that Wes Craven has always done well with, he connects it to real life. True the film has a more fantasy base than a reality but it lies in the inevitable fear that we must all sleep at some point. A vulnerability issues plays in this as in most people's cases when you sleep you are helpless. To add more depth Craven gives a disturbing background to the killer, Freddy Krueger, a child murder who escaped trial later to be burned by the incensed parents of Elm Street. I actually found out from the documentary, something which has always been a debate, is that Freddy is a child molester, but they don't come out and say it in the film for news related issues at the time. This discreetly presents itself in the sexual prowl Freddy has in scenes with Tina and Nancy. The famous one being where Nancy falls asleep in the bathtub and his glove comes up from the water in between her legs. It's hard for some to imagine Freddy as anything scary since he became a pop culture icon but in truth he was built to be a perturbing character, and the first film reminds us of that.


As far as quality goes I'll argue that this one is the best out of the seven (though Dream Master gives Craven a run for his money in directing, as well as for the the look for the film). The directing and writing for this is fairly obvious, so I wont linger too long but it's apparent what he intended out of the film, a sleepless night fueled by more than just jumps and scares, but with creative thought. Acting is fairly good here too, it's one of those horror movies that has a now a absurdly huge film star in it, Johnny Depp. Of course Glen doesn't compare to his more eccentric characters in which he's famous for but for a first time actor whose never, and I mean never, acted before he's pretty good in it. Heather Langenkemp is alright, having done a few movies in her career at that point and not succumbing to dumb gazes into the camera lens. Then there's John Saxon and Robert Englund, neither which I'll go into because Saxon is been in everything and he's just great, and I've believe I've made my love of Englund's acting clear in previous reviews. The special effects for the film are pretty good, in truth I prefer old school techniques like these as opposed to CGI which I can always tell they've used.

I'm sure this, basically, two paged love letter isn't obvious us enough that I have to say it flat out but I love A Nightmare on Elm Street. It's not only my favorite out of the franchise but one of my favorite horror films. But at the same time I pose caution to new viewers who've never seen the movie. Though it's not as bad as some it does show it's age a bit, so some scenes or concepts will appear as cheesy, and there are some that might not be as generous about the acting. Plus the ending, (not the very ending with the little girls) still fails to make sense. Either way it's sort of an essential see, Freddy Krueger is a household name and at the end of the day it's better than most slasher films and remakes today.

The Horror Icons

It's Monday...again. And I have a treacherously long research paper to write by Wednesday so forgive me if my writing isn't Shakespearean like (psh-as if it's ever). I have...no followers, still. But that's alright, I'll manage.

Horror movies are basically defined by these next top five. If you hear 'people are so stupid in those movies! They do the dumbest things' the statement has probably originated from the five (or four) films these guys appear in. But despite the hate these films, or more like icons, are infamous and I love every single one of them. My Top Five Horror Icons:

#5 "Ghost Face" (Scream 1996)

He may be considered the outcast in this since he's about a decade (or two) younger than the rest and he's not a supernatural killer. But admittedly if you see his face on TV or at Halloween store you're instantly going to identify the movie he's in. Ghost Face is simply scary because all it took was a couple of movie obsessed teenagers, 10 dollars for a costume (keep in mind this was the 90s), and Wes Craven and we have a satirical horror movie, that isn't far from being plausible.


#4 "Pinhead" (Hellraiser 1987)

Pinhead is amazing because he's cold, emotionless, and deeply into Sado Masochism. He also happens to the best looking demon out of the centobites. I'm not sure a further explanation is needed to explain as to why he's an eerie presence in any movie he's in. Oddly enough last week's number 4 only needed little explanation as well. Played by Doug Bradley in all the Hellraiser films.

#3 "Freddy Krueger" (A Nightmare on Elm Street 1984)

Who doesn't love Freddy Krueger? He has the most personality out of the icons. Dressed nicely in a dirty Christmas sweater, a ragged old hat, lovely 3rd degree burns, and his own pair of razor fingernails. He spends most of his nights taunting teenagers in their sleep, whom he later plans on killing, typically, in graphic bloody ways. The original Nightmare has the best murder scenes (Tina getting dragged across the ceiling, Glen getting sucked into the bed) but he still causes a few sleepless nights for newer fans. He's played by Robert England whose just a really good actor, horror or not. In the remake he was played by Jackie Earle Haley, who, IMO, is basically the only other person in Hollywood who can do this job.

#2 "Michael Myers" (Halloween 1978)

Michael Meyers is arguably the scariest killer in horror movies. I attribute it to his walk and his silence. He doesn't talk and he walks so fucking slow, which normally might make you think he's an idiot but here it's just a twist of killer suspense. One of the most memorable scenes for me is in the second Halloween when Laurie is trying to escape out the basement and he's right at then end of the hall. And all you keep thinking is if he runs to her she's dead, but he doesn't, and it just drives you insane cause there's too much suspense to handle. But I digress, I'm going to quote someone from the 100 Scariest Movie Moments and say; "It was such a blank face that the audience could project anything they wanted on it." -John Landis

#1 "Chucky" (Child's Play 1988)

I'm a chuckyaholic. I won't get into what possible reasons could conclude why I find a doll with stitches, a foul mouth, and a satanic laugh as cute (to take a stab in the dark I'm just going to have to say it's because I've always been odd) but in truth all dolls are naturally creepy. Don Mancini just amped it up with Chucky, making him the possessed soul of Charles Lee Ray or the Lake-shore Strangler. There's that unsaid rule of children not dying in horror movies and Chucky's basically gone out of his way to prove that wrong. He has yet to accomplish it but who knows. For the past 20 some years he's been played brilliantly by Brad Dourif who is returning to do the voice of him in the remake. Which I'm planning on seeing.

Honorable mentions; Leatherface, derived from real life killer Ed Gein he's a big ass dude who wears the faces of his victims. Despite the fact that I've never been a big Friday the 13th fan I'd be wrong not to include Jason, the hockey mask wearing mama's boy, who just happens to be carrying around a machete.

If your reading post your own.