Oh my god, what a boring movie. What a lame, dull, routine blah blah blah of a horror film. It's not a remake of Wes Craven's 1984 film. It's a rerun of any given horror film. Even as franchise based, formula horror films go, this is a film that should have been called A Nightmare on Elm Street - Freddy's Hangover.
But what did I expect, right? It's a Platinum Dunes cough-up with a cast full of TV-friendly young faces and a first feature for a director, wouldn't you know, who's previous work has included music videos. But, I'm a fair person. I hated the Texas Chainsaw Massacre one and I was only dulled-out by their Friday the 13th (part 11). And the director of this film, Samuel Bayer, did make the videos to Smells Like Teen Spirit for Nirvana and Disposable Teens for Marilyn Manson. The very titles are apt for a film like this, and their MTV-flashy colourfulness should be enough to make a watchable and stylish horror fair.
But this Nightmare is really quite the opposite. Starting out in grey, solemn, Omen-like colours I quickly began to wonder where the gloom would take us. Yes, this is all supposed to be a slightly more serious ride down Elm street. Jackie Earle Haley's Freddy is pretty covered in shadows, doesn't say very much and is not in the movie as much as you might imagine (much like the Freddy of the very first film). There's quite a lot of mood music here, quite a lot of troubled teenagers (one of them wears a Joy Division T-shirt, "Closer" no less, so we understand he's extra troubled) and there's an investigative plot where we find out more about Freddy's disturbing past.
But, here we go: SO WHAT? I'm not sure if the film realises it, but this Nightmare on Elm Street raises a lot of it's own stakes just by attempting to make it more serious. Seriousness is not a matter of style. Seriousness is not a matter of special effects, or crude violence or lack of humor. Or, as this film seems to think, the mere mentioning of child molestation. No, Mr. Scary Movie Sir, if you go down this path you better deliver. It is especially in that context that this reincarnation of Freddy is a big disappointment, if one were to have any expectations. They seem to believe that just by presenting an idea of an origin, they have automatically made a more serious film. They haven't. Given how much time is spent mooding the movie down all we get are bad actors giving out bad dialog during and after they end up in painfully standard scenarios (don't go out in the middle of the night to look for your dog... I mean, please, just this once, don't do it... oh, well, off you go). This 2010 take on Freddy is more or less equal to any given slasher film, only with zero memorable scares, less visual flair and excitement and a lot more mood music, ending up nowhere.
There are details from Wes Craven's film operated into this film. You know, Johnny Depp's original sweater is worn by one of the actors, there's the bloody body bag, the hand up the bathtub, the coming-out-of- the-wall-shot, so on and so forth. Thus, they failed to listen to the oldest of film making rules: Don't make references to films way better than your own. If they think they can do it because of the vain assumption that this is a remake they are wrong. This is not a remake of a movie, it's a remake of a concept. And it's painfully boring and unexciting. "Whatever you do" the line goes, "don't fall asleep". Insert your own pun here.
But what did I expect, right? It's a Platinum Dunes cough-up with a cast full of TV-friendly young faces and a first feature for a director, wouldn't you know, who's previous work has included music videos. But, I'm a fair person. I hated the Texas Chainsaw Massacre one and I was only dulled-out by their Friday the 13th (part 11). And the director of this film, Samuel Bayer, did make the videos to Smells Like Teen Spirit for Nirvana and Disposable Teens for Marilyn Manson. The very titles are apt for a film like this, and their MTV-flashy colourfulness should be enough to make a watchable and stylish horror fair.
But this Nightmare is really quite the opposite. Starting out in grey, solemn, Omen-like colours I quickly began to wonder where the gloom would take us. Yes, this is all supposed to be a slightly more serious ride down Elm street. Jackie Earle Haley's Freddy is pretty covered in shadows, doesn't say very much and is not in the movie as much as you might imagine (much like the Freddy of the very first film). There's quite a lot of mood music here, quite a lot of troubled teenagers (one of them wears a Joy Division T-shirt, "Closer" no less, so we understand he's extra troubled) and there's an investigative plot where we find out more about Freddy's disturbing past.
But, here we go: SO WHAT? I'm not sure if the film realises it, but this Nightmare on Elm Street raises a lot of it's own stakes just by attempting to make it more serious. Seriousness is not a matter of style. Seriousness is not a matter of special effects, or crude violence or lack of humor. Or, as this film seems to think, the mere mentioning of child molestation. No, Mr. Scary Movie Sir, if you go down this path you better deliver. It is especially in that context that this reincarnation of Freddy is a big disappointment, if one were to have any expectations. They seem to believe that just by presenting an idea of an origin, they have automatically made a more serious film. They haven't. Given how much time is spent mooding the movie down all we get are bad actors giving out bad dialog during and after they end up in painfully standard scenarios (don't go out in the middle of the night to look for your dog... I mean, please, just this once, don't do it... oh, well, off you go). This 2010 take on Freddy is more or less equal to any given slasher film, only with zero memorable scares, less visual flair and excitement and a lot more mood music, ending up nowhere.
There are details from Wes Craven's film operated into this film. You know, Johnny Depp's original sweater is worn by one of the actors, there's the bloody body bag, the hand up the bathtub, the coming-out-of- the-wall-shot, so on and so forth. Thus, they failed to listen to the oldest of film making rules: Don't make references to films way better than your own. If they think they can do it because of the vain assumption that this is a remake they are wrong. This is not a remake of a movie, it's a remake of a concept. And it's painfully boring and unexciting. "Whatever you do" the line goes, "don't fall asleep". Insert your own pun here.