A little spoiler light sneak peak at the script for the reboot of Nightmare on Elm Street has hit the net, and thanks to Latino Review, we get a look
The original “Nightmare” was written and directed by Wes Craven and released in 1984. The new project will keep the high school setting and delve deeper in the psychology of nightmares and Freddy Krueger himself.
For a movie that starts next month, I am surprised that it doesn’t have Freddy Cast yet. One of my big concerns is that Freddy’s sardonic wit will be absent, but as mentioned in the review, there seems to be room in the script for an actor to ad lib some new life into the character. The video review on the site also discusses a role that may serve as Robert Englund’s cameo appearance.
I always wished they hit on Freddy’s past. Not that I think a full origin story needs to be laid out on screen, but just a little more than sharing a line or two to establish who Freddy was. There was always dialogue shared that lets you know what the urban legends are with the character, but this chapter will actually define what happened more clearly.
The original tale exposed in the movies through oral tradition as opposed to “fact” told of a custodian who was always friendly with the kids who turned out to be a child molestor. When Freddy got off the charges on a technicality, the local parents turn to vigilante justice and throw him in the school’s boiler. He returns years later in the form of a dream stalking spirit to exact his revenge.
This reboot will have you wondering if he really was a child molestor, or is he getting his revenge due to false accusations that cost him his life? The original just always assumed he was always evil, but maybe the false accusations MADE him evil. Interesting twist, if only in symantics.
Still waiting to see who is cast as Freddy.
Yeah, Darren pretty much hit the nail on the head here. The “wrongly accused” angle completely defies logic. As also stated, it messes with a lot of the origin and symbolism of the glove, his most iconic element.
I really don’t think Freddy needs to have a film that explores his origin in such detail. Part of what made him so scary was the constant “is it real or not” to every degree of the character. He preys on fear, and a lot of that fear comes from the legend, myth and stories told about him. The audience relate to that fear by also never quite knowing the truth. If the truth was that he never did anything in the first place… lame. Because, again, it defies the essential part of the origin, that he was so evil to begin with that the parents killed him, only to find that wouldn’t even stop his evil.
You telling me that it is inconcievable that an innocent man who’s life is completely ruined because of some kids false testimony couldn’t turn evil?
If everything I am was suddenly thrown into an irreversible mess because someone else lied, I would be pretty upset.
Just sayin.
I dunno, I just picture Freddy as being the kind of ‘evil’ that exists because he just enjoys it. He doesn’t need to be given motivation for why he ‘became’ evil, he works best as a character who just always was evil.
I don’t think the story being proposed is bad in itself, just that it doesn’t fit with how I see Freddy. When I say it ‘defies logic’, I mean it simply defies the logic already established as being the motivation of Freddy. It doesn’t defy logic in general. The story could work, but not for Freddy. This makes Freddy too much of a sympathetic character, he shouldn’t have any redeeming qualities at all. And as upset as you may be in this scenario, I don’t see something like this making a character completely evil, since really he has some justification for revenge.
Keep Freddy 100% pure evil I say!
“who turned out to be a child molestor”
First of all, let;s get one thing out of the way: it was said in the films that Fred Kruger was a serial killer who targeted children the character did not ‘molest’ them.
As to the spin on the redo, asking if Freddy was wrongly accused/hunted down…let’s suppose that’s true. Freddy comes from beyond the grave and into the nightmares of the surviving children/teens…all for revenge on those that hunted him down like Frankenstien’s monster.
One simple logic question: would a character like that be at all interested in who really did it/ set him up to begin with. I mean, you know, you’re dead, you want revenge,you haunt dreamland, your freakin’ skeleton can come back to life and still whack someone around with a shovel, and you DON’T want to go after the real bad guy?
By the way, what we really need is another Candyman movie…
Holy fucking shit. CANDY MOTHERFUCKING MAN.
Thank you Darren. Absolutely agree.
Sounds real thin. Still no actor cast as Freddy could mean they want to keep England in the film a secret. I dont like the idea of Freddy being a wrongly accused out for revenge type. If anything should be done in the remake its more Teens dying in nightmarish ways. I like it simple, such as he kills teens (like Jason) gets caught, Teens so scared his spirit corrupts their dreams so in turn you never know if Freddy is real or a figment of Teens imaginations.
That’s an interesting angle. But WHAT ABOUT the gloves? In the original he made them himself to make his “experiences” more “enjoyable.” If he was never a murderer, how do you explain those? Does he just come back from hell with giant fingernails? And if he’s dead, how does he make them?. If they can nail that down, then the story is sound. Good idea, though. As long as it’s not the classic cheesy/gory/stupid horror movie.
A very interesting question, indeed. Perhaps maybe in this remake he doesn’t make an actual glove and instead he builds something onto his own hand? I’m not sure how that would work, but that would be awesome.
Or since he IS a demon, the claws could actually be some form of symbolic weapon constructed by his own evil energy?
Or even, when the angry mob of parents confront him, he could use some sort of weapon in a desperate attempt to defend himself?
I heard Freddy is a gardener at the local school in the remake so i guess he’ll be triming bush’s with the glove.
The casting of Freddy is going to be the make or break for me, find someone interesting to play Freddy and i’ll give the film a try.
“I heard Freddy is a gardener at the local school in the remake so i guess he’ll be trimming bush’s with the glove.”
was he also an orchestra conductor?
honestly they are beating a dead horse. I like some remakes don’t get me wrong, but this… this is taking it beyond beating a dead horse. Its like hanging the corpse up by the feet and just leaving it there until it slowly decomposes and falls off.
Hey, I think there was one of the movies that had Freddy`s daughter involved, and she remembered, as a little child, walking into the basement of their house one day, and finding his daddy`s “special” gloves (with knives and all), and some other stuff that let you know that paps was up to no good…
That should be canon for “freddy was bad”…shouldnt it?
the one w/ his daughter was freddy’ dead the final nightmare
I didn’t see the Halloween remake; I certainly don’t see myself seeing this remake either.
Some things just need to be left alone.
LThe Halloween remake was REALLY good. Rob Zombie is a great director.
Rob Zombie a great director? are you serious?
Half the people in the theatre walked out on Halloween and his first 2 movies (house of 1000 corpses and devils rejects) were utter crap. His music is good but his directing sucks
JOedy
ditto
it was aight.
Everything about Rob Zombie blows big whale dick! Except his wife; although she proly blows good if yall know what I mean.
so you’re thinking kind of a darkness falls mythos
(nice to kids, something happens to kids, stupid adults automatically assume the worst)
Am I right?