We checked out the Nightmare on Elm Street remake a few weeks ago. It was better than the Friday the 13th remake and the Halloween remake but not comparable to the Texas Chainsaw remake, which was very well done and better than the original, in my opinion. Nightmare on Elm Street, not so much. For starters, I don’t understand why the new Freddy Krueger was so short. His burned face was much less scary than the original Freddy, and I have to say that having high school kids tower over him did take away some of the intended fright. Also, Freddy’s back-story changed for the new version, which now includes allusions to child abuse of Freddy’s victims at a preschool rather than all of the terrorized kids being from Elm Street. In fact, I don’t really know what Elm Street has to do with the new version of Nightmare on Elm Street. Part of the reason we wanted to check this one out is because much of it was filmed in the suburbs of Chicago where we grew up, but we didn’t recognize anything, and my husband did not recognize which scenes were filmed in his former high school. But not recognizing the filming locations was not what disappointed us most – the 2010 version of Nightmare on Elm Street is just not as scary as the original. Sure, the special effects are better and the throwback and remakes of certain key scenes were done well and appreciated, but the movie just didn’t have the same effect.
We also recently took in the original My Bloody Valentine, the 1981 version, and it was a good horror movie. I read afterward that much of it is actually filmed in real mines, which must have been really dangerous, and I wish I had known that before I watched the movie. Many things were changed for the 2009 version, which I really enjoyed – probably my favorite modern day horror movie. But to enjoy the original version was nice too. We picked up the 2009 version on a sale at Walmart, and it came with both the 2D and 3D version and some glasses. I’ve never had any luck with the old red/green 3D glasses technology, and this time was no exception – my vision is just too uneven, I guess. It worked for my husband, but I ruined his fun because seeing everything in red and green was incredibly distracting for me.
We’ve also been watching the After Dark Horror Fest movies lately, and there have been too many to review, so I’ll just make quick lists of recommended vs. terrible ones for any horror fanatics reading my blog and looking for some opinions.
Perfect Getaway (more thriller than horror, but good)
My Bloody Valentine 3D (2009) – especially if you can get the 3D to work for you at home. The 3D for this one in the theater was amazing, and I really enjoyed my first horror movie 3D experience on the big screen when it came out.
Worth one viewing:
My Bloody Valentine (1981)
Awful waste of time:
And, I think I’ll throw this one out there separately since it’s not horror at all, but we also watched The Prestige again yesterday and it’s very good – especially the second time around. It’s a story about two rival magicians that takes place in the 1890’s. If you’re going to give it a try, pay attention! Oh, and I would not look too closely at the imdb entry for it – there is too much that can be given away. That’s all I’m going to say other than I highly recommend it, but again -it is in no way a horror film; we just watched it again recently which is why I put it in this horror-movie-laden post.
2 thoughts on “Nightmare On… Elm Street?”
I liked the Prestige, too. I’ll have to look into MBV 3D to see if it works for me. I’ve often wondered about the After Dark films. They sound interesting enough. I’m still not completely sold on the NOES remake. After the first couple in the original series they became less and less scary until they became a parody of themselves. I did like the “Nancy” trilogy.
I also read that the new Freddy was terrible. I don’t think I’ll ever bother with this one, nostalgia or no.