The Official Trailer for A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 12:33pm

Not sure how I feel about this.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=63620005

Updated On: 9/28/09 at 12:33 PM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 2:12pm

I think it looks pretty good!

I was a little worried before I saw this, but it looks like it's going to be fun!

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 2:37pm

Four--no, THREE!--words that should make every moviegoers skin crawl:

From. Michael. Bay.

Updated On: 9/28/09 at 02:37 PM

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 2:42pm

Okay, it could be that I am just tired as hell, but isn't that only three words?

And as long as Michael Bay doesn't direct it, I'm fine. Can't wait to see the trailer when I get home

Updated On: 9/28/09 at 02:42 PM

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 2:47pm

No Spider, you are bright eyed and bushy tailed, I'm just turning into my mother.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 2:50pm

hahaha. It's cool. Gotz to look out for my peeps *holds up bww gang sign*

[bschneid76]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:01pm

I don't think it will half as good as the original. Plus, no one can play Krueger like Robert Englund. Trailer looks effective enough, but I will stick to the original.

[Pgenre]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:04pm

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

What a bore.

I'm much more interested in Jackie Earle Hayley's insane prisoner in Scorsese's SHUTTER ISLAND than this re-hash.

NIGHTMARE is just not a property that needs to be re-made, and I LIKED Zombie's take on HALLOWEEN because HALLOWEEN itself was a rip-off of Argento so it's not sacred in the same way (plus I like what he did with it - and there's always the original). But NIGHTMARE is Wes's ORIGINAL... and yes, there's always the original we can go back to now with this burgeoning remake... but... eh...

P

[bethnor]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:08pm

borstal--it was b/c the trailer has "from producer michael bay" that you put four. it was burnt in your mind...

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:21pm

As long as they don't bastardize the backstory, like Zombie did with HALLOWEEN, it should be okay for me. Just don't make Freddy come from a well established homelife. He is the son of 100 maniacs that raped his mother (who is a nun). Keep the backstory intact. PLEASE!!!

Updated On: 9/28/09 at 03:21 PM

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:28pm

Did Zombie bastardize Halloween? I never saw the original.

I think Robert England's voice was one of the creepier aspects of Freddy's personae. I didn't like his voice in the trailer.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:38pm

Yes, Zombie did. The original didn't go into detail about Michael's childhood (there is probably a total of 10 minutes in the whole movie that is dedicated to him as a child when he murders his sister), but in that 10 minutes you find out that he is raised in a white, middle to upper class, suburban family. Which, to me, makes it all the creepier that Michael is like that. In Zombie's version, he is raised my abusive rednecks, which takes a lot of the creepiness out of it. In Zombie's remake, you kinda go "Well no wonder he is like that." And in the sequel, the vision of his mom drives him to kill.

Updated On: 9/28/09 at 03:38 PM

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:39pm

Pretty much, Zombie turned Michael into Jason

[Pgenre]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 3:50pm

I hate to burst your bubble, spiderj, but what you call "abusive rednecks" is a hell of a lot closer to the TRUE "white, suburban middle class family" than the Donna Reed/Father Knows Best milieu of the Carpenter original ever did (whether Michael's flashbacks OR Laurie's ten-years-later reality). As someone who grew up in Binghamton, NY (the home of THE TWILIGHT ZONE and IBM) I can tell you that there are a lot more kids like Zombie's Michael than Carpenter's. I suppose you prefer the "mythic", and that's great... but to say it is less accurate or less appropriate for the story just isn't so. Sure, the remake is SET in the 70s, but he made it for modern sensibilities so that must be taken into account. And while we may like to THINK there were FEWER families like that ("abusive rednecks") then, there were just as many but the media did not portray or cater to them nearly as much. Then came NASCAR and CMT (not making any implications beyond the fact that this is where you are most likely to find said "abusive rednecks" more than anywhere else)... and suddenly we can put faces to names...

More children go hungry in this country everyday than dogs, you know. Sometimes we sit too far behind the white picket fence sipping lemonade on the porch to see the rotting dismembered ear on the lawn, to boil down BLUE VELVET (a big Zombie influence) into a sentence...

... there are a lot of different Americas in America...

P

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 4:39pm

Woah! Michael's parents in the 1978 version could have very well abused him. But, when the parents get out of the car, the mom is wearing a dress and pearls and the dad is in a business suit. John Carpenter used the suburban house and family to show that evil can come from anywhere. Zombie used every cliche in the book to show why Michael was the way he is. And that mystical bullcrap from Halloween 5 and 6 is just plain stupid. What made Michael so unique in the horror genre, was that he HAD no backstory or hint at what caused him to do what he did. He was just insane. Freddy had the abusive classmates and the mom who pretty much abandoned him......Jason had the kids who taunted and abused him and the councelor's who were having sex instead of watching him (plus the whole mom getting decapitated thing)....Letherface had the family, etc. Michael had none of that. When people started giving Michael a reason to be evil, it ruined the character. At that point, he is just another Jason. And in Zombies sequel, he really did turn Michael into Jason by having "mommy" drive him to kill.

Ps. I love how this thread turned from Freddy to Michael.

Updated On: 9/28/09 at 04:39 PM

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 6:07pm

I thought this wasn't supposed to be out until October. What happened?

[blaxx]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 6:32pm

I don't know how I feel about showing Freddy's background in such a realistic manner. I always wanted to see how he got killed, but never him, but the events surrounding his killing (if that makes sense, like a dream sequence).

I think showing him before the burning, makes the character too human - almost like a regular guy getting super powers. Oh well, the rest looks fine, I guess.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 6:49pm

Im sorry but the Halloween remake was a mess.

It missed the point over and over again of what made Michael and the story scary, it was about suspense, waiting, atmosphere, childhood fears etc. The new version was about bloos and gore, bad laungauge and shock value. None of the charachters were likable at all, i could not care less of the Laurie from the new version died or not, she bugged the hell out of me.

It was also full of to many explanations. Did we really need to see the scene at the truck stop just to explain where michael got his overalls from?? of course we didnt, it was thrown in for the body count.

The backstory dragged and the escape from the institute was awful (though not as bad as the one they originally filmed which i have on dvd)

The ending was overlong (again the test screening version wrapped it up quicker, right by the front door when he had Laurie) it was pulled out AGAIN for shock or gore.

The whole premise of the original was lost and Zombie gave it his usual naff makeover (as well as put his god awful wife in, kill her and then bring her back for the 2nd one which manages to be even worse)

The stories of films (especially slasher films) are never original so it should not matter if Halloween was similar to another film, all films are. And whilst im a huge fan of Elm Street (like a HUGE fan) it was not original as it was based on stories Wes read in the paper and also is very similar to a film that came out a few years before it.

The Halloween remake was a joke which was aimed at teenagers who respond to OTT shocks, thats not what Halloween was.

[blaxx]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 7:01pm

Now back to A Nightmare on Elm Street...

[Pgenre]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 7:28pm

"The stories of films (especially slasher films) are never original so it should not matter if Halloween was similar to another film, all films are."

Not if your name is Dario Argento and you essentially INVENTED the entire fvcking GENRE! Credit to Mario Bava, his mentor, whose BAY OF BLOOD is, indeed, the first official "slasher" movie. Argento added the style and everything else which was then outright stolen by Carpenter in creating the visual style of the film and Michael's "stalking vision".

But, it is vastly apparent you know NOTHING of such things, nor care, songanddanceman.

P

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 7:38pm

Pgenre,

Why are you so snotty?

[Pgenre]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 7:51pm

"Snotty"? I'm only "snotty" the day after I hang out with Roman, Jack and Anjelica, TheatreDiva.

It IRRITATES me, though I don't think I have come across particularly irritated in THIS thread, when people try to talk on subjects they know little to nothing about. Particularly people who fail to see how essentially ALL of American film horror with the exception of Hitchcock is a bland or subpar version of (usually) Italian or Japanese films, many of which are true works of art in their own right. To this I would cite any number of films and directors, but the most blatent plagiarism seems to stem from those aping Argento (who, admittedly, apes a good deal of Hitchcock). Being a screenwriter who has worked on a number of horror scripts, the genre is closer than any other to my heart and there's a lot of misinformation out there.

At the VERY least, I really think one needs to see Bava's BAY OF BLOOD and Argento's DEEP RED, ELEMENTARY in understanding HALLOWEEN and its remake and what a "slasher" film truly is, then we can have a discussion about slasher films. Otherwise, it's like writing a novel using no vowels.

P

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 8:15pm

"Not if your name is Dario Argento and you essentially INVENTED the entire fvcking GENRE"

Wait i think you will find films way earlier (Psycho) paved the way for the slasher genre.

Im a HUGE Dario fan but to credit him with inventing the slasher genre is absurd.

And i stand by (even through your swearing) that no horror films/slasher films are original as they all take their influence from true stories/urban legends/greek tradegdy etc

For someone who is a fan of Dario and his work to then go on and praise a crittcally panned remake of Halloween, well that just strikes me as odd.

Dario was all about style and imagery, something the new Halloween lacked. It turned an atmospheric american thriller/slasher in to a run of the mill slasher. Halloween was a stalk and slash movie played through primal fears, the new one scrapped the stalk and fear and upped the slasher.

Zombie also failed in his way to show how Michale became who he was. The red neck story telling was silly, im not saying that there aint more red necks in that area or that would be closer to the way of life blah blah blah, but the whole thing was that it was middle class surburbia.
It was similar to Desperate Housewives in the sense that it made it more creepy because it happened in a place that we dont think of these things happening. Where the well run houses, the picket fences hold darkness behind them..........thats the point Zombie missed, thats why the critics hated it and the new number 2.

And also, so what if carpenter took influence from Dario, do you think Dario didnt take influence from anywhere.....Grand Guignol? dont be so silly

All directors, writers take influence from somewhere, even Dario.
And as i said about your Nightmare point with it been oh so original for Wes, the movie is based on newspaper reports of a young man who died in his sleep and also is very similar to a movie that came out a few years before.

The slasher genre started to take shape through Grand Guignol plays in paris and eventually started to shape in to stories told through film, the horror genre started to change through films like Pyscho and a few years later Dario films before films like Black Christmas (the 1st of the true slashers for the new era) and Halloween opened it up to the mainstream audience.

Sorry to go on, but im so in love with this genre lol, i studied the Horror Genre through theatre and film at College

As for the new Elm Street remake, we all know its pointless like most remakes are but i will say it deserves a chance before we just write it off. I adore Elm Street (another turning point in the history of the slasher) and even its average to bad sequels, but im gonna wait and see 1st before passing judgement.

The trailer is intresting, i like the cinematography from what i can see and the bfief scenes look fun and the nods to the original are much appreciated. Its strange to see a new actor playing Freddy but im willing to give him a chance as he is a damn good actor.
Years ago i had the knives out for the Chainsaw remake and i was wrong. It turned out to be an effective and scary slasher which brought a lot of new ideas to the original (and had a great performance from Biel). Granted the other Platinum Dunnes releases have been a bit naff, but with this one i will wait and see.

So please dont make out like you are the know it all of the genre as other people on here have studied this genre inside out

Updated On: 9/28/09 at 08:15 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 8:29pm

I'm embarrassed for you.

[songanddanceman2]

Posted: 9/28/09 at 8:29pm

Also long before Dario was Thirteen Women or Peeping Tom