The Drudgeon reviews A Nightmare On Elm Street

A Nightmare On Elm Street 95 min., 2010
Written by Wesley Strick/Eric Heisserer
Directed by Samuel Bayer
Language: English
My rating: ★

michael bay (capitalization gives importance and he has none) strikes again!

* * *

The movie begins in a diner with a teen named Dean (Kellan Lutz).  He asks for more coffee but the one waitress that is there doesn’t listen and walks into the kitchen.  He follows and he sees one of the stoves on fire.  He continues walking and we see a clawed glove appear.  The man with the glove strikes at Dean and that’s when he wakes up.  The waitress from his dream walks up and we find that it’s his friend Nancy (Rooney Mara).  Another girl walks in and goes to his table, which happens to be his girlfriend Kris (Katie Cassidy).  After some talking he starts dreaming and we see the man with the glove attacking him.  The man’s name is Freddy Krueger (Jackie Earle Haley).  In the dream Dean dies and in the real world he also dies.  Now the rest of them have to work together and try and figure out who he is and what he wants.  But with having to stay awake do they have the time?

This is my biggest complaint about this movie.  The acting was just complete trash.  None of the characters had any form of chemistry.  Having actors show that they are in love is a pretty hard thing to do, but these actors aren’t even supposed to do that.  They are just supposed to convey that they’re just friends, and they fail miserably at that.  The whole time they are just reciting lines that they read right before the take, and there was no attempt to put any emotions behind any of their dialogue, and that’s just sad.  The biggest surprise was with Jackie Earle Haley.  I was expecting more from him and I got a lot of crap.  Well I shouldn’t say that he was completely terrible, because I think it was more the fact that they dubbed his dialogue in after the fact and there were a bunch of times where it just didn’t sync up.  Most of the time he’s moving his mouth like he’s a fucking Muppet and I LOVE THE FUCKING MUPPETS but when it’s a Muppet, not a human.  Then we have to toss in the fact that they had him talking almost entirely in monotone.  How sad is it when you have him trying to make a pun about a wet dream (which, by the way, was done ten billion times better and funnier in part 4), but it’s in monotone.  It’s not funny at all, because (like everything else in this piece of shit movie) there was no emotion in it at all.  The same could be said about his body movement.  No emotion behind them.  He moves like a fucking wet noodle or scared child, unlike the old Freddy who had so much confidence behind him that when he walked into a room you were forced to take notice.

This movie was a CG orgy.  The simplest things that could have been done with prosthetics or squibs are now full on CG and most of the time it is painfully obvious that that’s what it is.  None of the effects seem to gel together and they all stick out like a sore, swollen and covered in shit middle finger.  Now the biggest problem with the effects comes from Freddy’s burned face.  It is never consistent, with the burns changing spots and changing severity.  That is really sad when they can’t even get that right.  Another thing that was just strange to me was, in the original when Freddy scraped his “claws” across metal, they made this high pitched scraping sound, but in this one they sparked?  I just don’t get it.  Is Freddy full of electricity?  Is his finger constantly attached to a socket?  The thing that made the original sound creepy is that outside of a dream you could actually hear it in a normal day.  Sparks are just not scary!  No matter who is making them!

What can I say about this movie?  The first thing is that it shouldn’t have been made.  Now I’m not a horror movie snob and think that movies shouldn’t ever be remade.  There are a lot of remakes that are actually superior then their originals: House On Haunted Hill, The Omen, The Thing (the John Carpenter version), The Blob and The Toolbox Murders are great examples.  Then there are some movies that are remade and they lose the original feel of the movie and that is what I look for in a remake.  If I’m watching it and get the feel that they respect the original and they are just updating the movie instead of making it “better” that’s when I can actually enjoy it.  But when you have directors and production companies (platinum dunes (and no I will not capitalize them) cough cough) that are doing a remake and are trying to show that their movie is superior to the original, then that’s when I have a hard time enjoying the movie and this is one of those types.  Lame, stupid and flat out unimaginative is all you will get from this steaming pile of elephant poop!

Have You Read...?

About The Drudgeon

I don't remember my real name or where I came from. All I know is that I'm traped in an underground cave with nothing but a TV, DVD player and a notebook and pen. They keep calling me The Drudgeon, I don't even know what that means. Someone keeps dropping horror movies in and yelling at me to watch them and write about what I watch. Then I eat the DVD and case, because they tell me if I consume the horror I will understand the horror. I think there are three of them. So if you are reading this right now, HELP ME!!!!!!! OUCH!!!! Someone just poked me with a sea urchin attacked to a pool cue, what the fuck is going on?
This entry was posted in Movies and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to The Drudgeon reviews A Nightmare On Elm Street

  1. mel says:

    I COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE!!!!! This movie was a joke. I seriously laughed the whole time. As you mentioned, Freddy was a man of confidence and you were forced to take notice. I don’t know what this “New Freddy” was supposed to be, but it was truley awful. I wouldn’t be scared of him. I would be irritated with his annoyance. If you are going to re-make on of the most iconic horror movies (or series), have the common effin sense to, gee, I don’t know, maybe DO A GOOD JOB????? It seems nothing is sacred anymore. *Sigh*

  2. Lackey says:

    capitalization gives importance and he has none


    1. Capitalization does not “give” importance. If Michael Bay is important, that importance isn’t derived from the capitalization of his name. If people stop capitalizing his name, it’s not going to destroy his career. (Might be worth a try, though.) I’m assuming that by “gives” you actually meant something to the effect of “indicates” or “denotes”…

    2. …and that’s wrong as well. Proper nouns (such as “Michael” and “Bay”) aren’t capitalized because they’re “important.” Yes, I realize your grade school teachers probably taught you that “important words” should be capitalized. Schoolhouse Rock might have done so as well. But they were/are wrong. Proper nouns aren’t capitalized because they’re “important”; they’re capitalized because they’re proper nouns. And no definition of “proper noun” I read discussed “importance.”

    3. Even if proper nouns are “important,” we capitalize them because the words themselves are important, not because the thing they signify is. In other words, “Michael Bay” is capitalized because the words Michael and Bay are important (they are proper nouns)…not because Michael Bay is an important person.

    The definition of the word “important” is a whole ‘nother argument for a different time.


  3. John Bruni says:

    I saw this piece of shit movie a loooong time ago in the theater (don’t worry, I snuck in, so I didn’t give Bay any money for this), but I was kind of drunk at the time and I thought I might have been a bit hasty in my judgment of this movie. I gave it a second chance last week (and I didn’t pay for it then, either). I was right the first time. I should have trusted my initial drunkard instincts. It’s a shame, because I think Haley is a good actor, but he sucks in this one along with everyone else involved in this suckfest.

Leave a Reply