Review of A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) by Gimly M — 25 Nov 2013

In 1983, horror master Wes Craven released the supernatural film that introduced world-renowned actor Johnny Depp, made enough money to get now-famous New Line Cinema off the ground, spawned no less than 6 sequels, a television show spin-off, several novels and comic books, as well as countless other articles of paraphernalia, and creating one of the most frightening antagonists ever, who would go on to fight Slasher-Royalty Jason Vorhees in a 7th film. I am of course talking, about the original A Nightmare on Elm Street. Now, 28 years on, reboot-hotshots Platinum Dunes have brought out their take on Wes Craven's horror classic. As always, I'll be looking at what's been going on in the world of our beloved slashers and their latest incarnations.

So, what's Mr. Krueger up to, almost 3 decades later? Firstly; gone are the days of Robert Englund, with Jackie Earle Hayley taking up his melted mantle (although it is nice to see Robert Shaye still involved in the production process and the familiar original score in the film). Walking into A Nightmare on Elm Street just as the credits opened up, I felt a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach, I was already certain that it was going to disappoint. Even before the first scene was up, I was annoyed; the credits themselves had a neat little concept that seemed ruined by writing everything twice unnecessarily. Anyone who has seen the film will understand what I mean. Then of course there is the cheesy, cliché, tedious and totally obvious dream sequence. My worst fears had been confirmed; "Wow, that was a dream, oh my, how very shocked I am(!)", what a letdown. Then the obligatory blonde bimbo protagonist enters. You know, that "Final Girl" who ends up in a one-on-one melee with the bad guy, the one ten years older than the character she's portraying, with a mum who's practically her age, and a scream that makes you want to rip out your eardrums 'cause it's more pleasant than listening to the banshee-bitch for one more second? Yeah, that protagonist. How utterly disheartening. Then, something amazing happened. Something totally awesome that placed the new A Nightmare on Elm Street onto all manner of pedestals. Without giving too much away, I'll say that I was very wrong about Ms. Blonde Bimbo. Big time wrong. Being such a huge fan of the original, I should definitely have seen it coming, but I didn't. Hands up who gets it?

But I digress; at this point the film picks up and just keeps getting better. In fact, by the end, I was actually giving serious thought as to which A Nightmare on Elm Street was better, the reboot, or the original... Leaving all that aside, I should get on to what everybody wants to know about: Freddy Krueger! I don't believe that anybody could ever portray Freddy like Mr. Englund did, so (quite cleverly), Platinum Dunes doesn't try. Their Freddy is a much more sinister and imposing villain, who, although lacking the novelty of the original, came across as much more realistic (although, as a sidenote; I have heard this realism being described as making Freddy look like a "Melted Downie"). The new Freddy is all together more frightening, but as a price, his throwback humour doesn't work like it did with Robert Englund. What's more, despite Freddy himself being scary, the nightmares he is the God of were altogether... well, boring. The eccentric and chilling distorted reality of the dream-world was all but lost in the reboot. This was a big negative, but still, I was overall pleased with Jackie Earle Hayley's performance.

This was hardly a groundbreaking piece of cinema. Although, I did go back less than a fortnight later and watch it again (admittedly at the much cheaper Limelight cinema the second time around). I think what I'll be looking forward to most of all is a Special Edition DVD release, hopefully there will be an alternative ending to ameliorate the last six seconds of the piece, and maybe even some deleted dream-scenes. If we don't get this however, I would still recommend this movie to anyone who can stomach the medium-level gore. It's quite the hour and a half of entertainment with only one overwhelmingly dreadful drawbacks.

70%.

-Gimly.