The Daily Blabber Blog

  • Search the blog


The “A Nightmare On Elm Street” Remake Trailer.

I've had a bunch of people asking me if I've seen this trailer since I'm such a huge fan o' the series. Yeah, I've seen it and here it is for those of you who haven't:

You guys already know my stance on remakes... I think Hollywood should be focusing on creating original, new films rather than rehashing old ones. That said, I'll reserve my judgment of the Elm Street remake until after I've seen it. As for the one real glimpse we get of Freddy, I get that they're going for more realistic burn victim effects, but I'm not sold on his make-up yet. Freddy's old look was so iconic and we all know how many hours Englund spent sitting in a chair just to have it applied. Only thing I definitely like about the trailer is that Clancy Brown is in it... I love that guy. Whether it's Highlander, Bad Boys, The Shawshank Redemption, or the criminally underrated canceled HBO show "Carnivàle", he's always a memorable character. (And yes, I still foolishly hope there will be a Carnivàle movie some day so we get some real closure to an show that ended far too early.)

What do you guys think of the new trailer?



Nate (Guest) on 09/30/2009 4:44 pm

Gotta reserve any real judgement until I see an extended trailer or the actual flick...

But I will say that (from what I can tell from this trailer) for a remake, it at least looks like a good amount of it remains faithful to the originals (except for Freddy's looks, of course). I hope he will retain his sick sense of humor...

Btw, I'm with you, Rog. Has Hollywood completely lost it's ability to create new and original material? We all know that older movies and music are better, but gimme a break... This is overkill.

User avatar

-RoG- on 09/30/2009 4:49 pm

I wouldn't count on Freddy's humor to really be in this remake. The original Elm Street was a more serious horror flick, it was only in the sequels that he really started dishing out the twisted puns before he killed his victims.

User avatar

Hangie on 09/30/2009 4:52 pm

I couldn't see much of Freddy, he was all shadowy :(. Anyway I have never seen ANY of the elm st. movies so I don't really have any quaims with what I saw.

However, when freddy was running into his boiler room and he was screaming "What do you think I did, I didn't do anything", it didn't sound like a sadistic killer to me. I thought Freddy was supposed to be all sadistic, not a coward who would hide his crimes.



Wingz (Guest) on 09/30/2009 4:59 pm

Wherez the trike?!?

User avatar

danielsan4610 on 09/30/2009 5:06 pm

I really liked the opening scene with Freddy running from the mob and then it was all down hill. It continues the same trend (that started with Scream) of having Abercrombie models trying to act and be serious. It's the same crap Platinum Dunes did we all of their other remakes. You have to make the victims people you can relate to and care about.

The original Nancy was great. She was normal and down to Earth. I have no interest in 2009 "goth" Nancy and her douchebag friends. As far as Freddy goes, I like the direction they took and I think the glove and makeup looks interesting.

User avatar

Danny 4 Eyes on 09/30/2009 5:14 pm

Having been a massive fan Of the Nightmare films since my brother and sister traumatised me with them in the late 80's. I will be going to see the film no matter what.

I appreciate that you can't judge a film on a trailer, but 2 things that stand out for me are.

1. The voice of Freddy

2. His face

We have been brought up on Robert Englund for every Freddy film ever made, we have got used to his mannerisms and the way he portrays him. Jackie Earl Haley has a big glove to fill and he will want to add his own take on the character. Before people start critisizing it, we should just wait to see how the film turns out.

The same can be said for the make-up, the reason it seems so jarring on the trailer is like Rog said, the original make-up has become so Iconic. Am definitely looking forward to the film coming out. Mind you I enjoyed the Friday the 13th 'reboot', and I am a fan of the original ones.

User avatar

nirvana_infinity on 09/30/2009 5:21 pm

I watched this last night and I just can't really get into it. I loved the old Freddies, but this big trend of remaking classics blows. I'm sure I'll see it anyway, but I'm not expecting to be impressed.


Eric (Guest) on 09/30/2009 5:48 pm

well i won't bother seeing it since i dont like horror flicks but...intersting tidbit...they actually filmed some stuff not far from my house...if i'd known they were cast extras i woulda gone.


Jennifer (Guest) on 09/30/2009 5:59 pm

While my general stance on horror remakes is "opposed", I am interested in seeing how this one comes out. I know a lot of people are going to be upset when they see that Haley's representation of Krueger isn't going to be like Englund's, but that's to be expected. Not sure what to think about the makeup yet since he's in the shadows during the trailer, but the first thing that came to mind was Voldemort from the Harry Potter movies...

At least with Michael Bay as the producer, we can expect one thing: Unnecessary Explosions.


John Gabriel (Guest) on 09/30/2009 6:55 pm

I like the new take on Freddy. He's a good actor, and I think he can pull it off. Frankly, I'll probably see this movie exclusively for him.

Otherwise, I really don't care. It's going to be standard fare, most likely. Bland cast murdered. Ah well.

User avatar

Drunken_Lemur408 on 09/30/2009 6:56 pm

Why did HE have to be the producer? Anyone else but HIM! As for the trailer, well I have no reference point since I've never seen any Elm street film, but it piques my interest and does look like it might be the best of the neoclassic horror movie remakes. Not that it has much competition.

User avatar

Captain Seamus on 09/30/2009 6:58 pm

At worst, it'll be a forgettable rehash. At best, it'll be the original with new actors.(It didn't look like there was much that was really NEW, apart from the beginning of the trailer)

User avatar

FistfulOAwesome on 09/30/2009 7:24 pm

Color me unimpressed. This remake doesn't look bad. It looks worse than that. It looks average. I don't get any feeling of any real bit of originality from the trailer. It's even shot in my most hated of color-tones, Nightclub blue and Vomit Brown.

I'm not against a serious telling of the Freddy story. The problem is that since Halloween (the only good one), every slasher flick has been flawed by one thing: No protagonist to care for.

The reason Halloween works is because you care about Laurie. You see her acquaintances killed off by a sadistic killer and you worry for her, because she doesn't know what's coming and you do. She's a nice person, so you don't want her to suffer through something so horrible.

Every slasher flick afterwards fails because there isn't a single protagonist you care about. Sure, several have had one character who was focused on, but they generally end up being so annoying in a different way to the standard slut, mimbo, geek, stoner, ect. meat to grind that you still want them to die.

You don't care, and once you don't care you pray for the killer to come on screen and entertain you in some way. Any horror movie that makes you root for murder has failed. Nightmare doesn't look like it's changed this.

I'm not against the new Freddy either. Although the changed origin story is as flawed, since if he's innocent, then why's he killing the kids? If it's revenge, why not kill the parents?

As of now, I see this trailer and question what the point of this is. Nobody was begging for a Nightmare remake, and it certainly didn't need it. This movie doesn't seem to do anything that would make a remake worthwhile. It looks generic (Damn you Nightclub Blue/Vomit Brown!), the origin is flawed, and the kids are as damnable as ever. Who spent money on this?

User avatar

King Credo on 09/30/2009 8:29 pm

Okay. That just pisses me off. They could keep it rolling with a whole new movie with a new gimmick. Why roll it back to the first one? It's simple writing. Freddy shows up, kills sexy teenagers, makes jokes, dies. Repeat. All you need to worry about is how Freddy kills them this time and violence is nothing if you find the right guy to think up stuff.

I feel like giving up on the whole damned genre. What's the point of watching horror flicks if they're gonna get raped with cgi, worse storytelling, and lousy attempts to change the script? If I try to talk about a cool horror movie people will think I'm talking about the crappy new one and I'll have the same redundant rants about flaws and never get to bring up the good points of the original. Like why bother anymore? As soon as Zombi 2 gets greenlit for a remake I'm giving up on cinema period.

User avatar

saturnknight on 09/30/2009 9:27 pm

It looks like it might be good... but I'm not too sure. It might be good, but then again I'd prefer something new and not rehashed.

Didn't Freddy's face in the trailer remind you of Davey Jones from Pirates of the Caribbean 3? It looked and sounded hike he had some kind of offspring with the bald Valdamort dude from Harry Potter.

I'd of still preferred Freddy Vs Jason Vs Ash (i've got the comics scanned to my laptop if you're ever interested guys, they are epic (too bad sam rami backed out of the movie idea)


Number6Faye (Guest) on 09/30/2009 9:50 pm

I must admit that I looked forward to this trailer for several long months. Now, I'm a little disappointed. I'm going to go see this movie no matter what (not only because it's NOES, but it has Jackie Haley in it!), but I do wish that they kept the appearance (and voice) more like Englund's - Jackie reminds me more of Mason Verger from Hannibal rather than Freddy!

For all those who've almost given up on the newer horror flicks, what about Dead Silence from 2008? It's the only recent horror movie I've seen that's successfully creeped me out enough to turn on lights in every room the same day I watched it - and I watched it with a friend of mine in the late afternoon at my house, before the damn sun set! Due to years of watching horror and slasher films I've become really hard to scare, but Dead Silence really ups the creepy factor from a usual 2 to a whopping 7 out of 10. If you haven't seen it, go watch it.

User avatar

Protoclown on 09/30/2009 11:03 pm

I will reserve judgment until I see it, as I like Jackie Earl Haley, but I think this phrase says it all:

"Produced by Michael Bay"



Dave (Guest) on 09/30/2009 11:08 pm

Hollywood makes a ton of original movies every year. The problem is a lot of people don't go to see them. Remakes and sequels have a built-in audience. Simple economics.

The Orphan was an original and well made horror film. Zombieland is a pretty damn original movie. But neither will makes the money the latest Saw sequel or NMOES remake will make.


Dave (Guest) on 09/30/2009 11:12 pm

"Produced by Michael Bay


This makes me like it actually. Now I want to see it. Anyone that Megan Fox hates must be a good person. There is not a more stupid or loathsome person on the planet than Megan Fox. I'll support anyone that airhead disses. You got my money Michael Bay.

User avatar

Vault Master on 09/30/2009 11:29 pm



And your "Freddy" had better be sadistic, with no remorse whatsoever. I see or hear anymore of this "I didn't do it" bullshit coming from "Freddy's" mouth, and I promise that I will turn your life into one of your own movies; full of explosions with lots of begging for it to end.

User avatar

-RoG- on 10/01/2009 12:03 am

"Hollywood makes a ton of original movies every year. The problem is a lot of people don't go to see them. Remakes and sequels have a built-in audience. Simple economics."

Dave - Actually, the problem is that Hollywood doesn't give the original ones much of a chance. Take "Trick 'R Treat" for example. It was one of the highest rated original horror movies ever made after just a few screenings, and people were dying to see it just based on the trailers, but what happened? The studios decided not to release it to theaters and instead put it direct to DVD a year later. Meanwhile, they have no problem greenlighting the nationwide theatrical release of the insanely bad "Prom Night" remake.

You're right, there are plenty of original horror films still being made, but the studios have their heads so far up their asses that most of us will never get to see those films in real theaters.

User avatar

imockyou on 10/01/2009 12:05 am

You can't beat the classics, in my opinion. I may rent it sometime but I'm not going to the theater for it. Freddy had better be a sick, sadistic, twisted son of a bastard too.

Or maybe something a bit like Dexter.

User avatar

dextire on 10/01/2009 12:29 am

I have no problem with remakes. In fact, I'm all for them. The worst thing that can happen with a remake is that it sucks in every way. Everything about it absolutely blows and is a bastardization of everything that's right with the original. You then get a new appreciation of what makes the original so good. And more then likely you get to enjoy the original on a new special edition DVD.

Then again you might just like the remake. Maybe it takes a new view on the story that you like. Maybe it fixes a character that annoys the hell out of you in the original. And in some extremely rare cases, you might even like it more than the original.

Remakes have been made since the beginning of films. Some of my friends surprised me when they were completely pissed off that they dared to try to remake "House of Wax". I reminded them that the "original" 1953 version we like so much, is in fact a remake.

So perhaps the new Elm Street will suck. Or maybe it will be great. Either way I'll still enjoy the original just the same.

Now if we can just get them to remake "The Boogens", "Demon Wind", and "Ghost Town" maybe they would finally put the damn things on DVD!

User avatar

Wyldflame on 10/01/2009 2:22 am

No Heather, No Robert...and Michael Fucking Bay...

The guy is a Goddamned terrorist.
As if he didn't piss on my childhood enough when he ruined transformers.

I just....why?

User avatar

Vault Master on 10/01/2009 5:44 am

Oh, and that's another thing that really cheeses my grits. How can you make a NOES movie without Robert "I AM FREDDY KRUEGER MOTHER-FUCKERS" Englund?!??!

I mean, I try and have hope, I really do, but countless gow-awful remakes are making it really, REALLY hard not to judge them at a glance, and such a glaring ommision of what kept the series alive and awesome for so long, just puts it past the "benefit of the doubt" line for me. Hell, I had high hopes for the Friday the 13th remake, but... ugh. Jason's mom as a flowing white ghost on a horse?


This will, with 99% probability, be similarly dissapointing/rage-inducing.

Oh, wait, no Robert Englund, so yeah, 200% probability of shitty.

User avatar

Kat on 10/01/2009 6:45 am

Apparently, this is a closer look.

For the most part, I agree with Rog. I wish the remakes and sequels would stop (not that there haven't been some good ones). But as for the video, I think the only thing that really gets me is what Freddy said. I realise not every line needs to be iconic...but out of all the lines in the movie, they put "This won't hurt one little bit" into the trailer. Call me paranoid, but it makes me think that the script isn't very good. And the sound of his voice is what I have the hardest time getting on board with, but I guess we can't all be Robert Englunds.


Stranger (Guest) on 10/01/2009 10:14 am

I dunno... some scenes look pretty good, like Freddys boiler room, but I just dont know about the new look on Freddy, not to mention his voice. I'd rather have the original, honestly

User avatar

luckypyjamas on 10/01/2009 11:47 am

i wasn't a huge fan of the original nightmare on elm street, it did have some great moments. this just looks bland, i have to agree with the two main complaints everyone seems to have, which is a) no robert englund and b) fucking michael bay? i have no intention of seeing this..


Jimbob Jones (Guest) on 10/01/2009 11:52 am

The only part I REALLY hated about it was Freddy yelling "I didn't do it" at the beginning.

Why the hell do they want us to feel SORRY for Freddy, or to doubt how evil he is? Half the fun of Elm Street films is him killing the kids without any real justification (besides being burned, which they let you know was TOTALLY justified). Now, you have to wonder if he's justified in offing these kids, which is just wrong.

And, yeah, I also can't say I'm too high on Freddy looking like Voldemort.

User avatar

-RoG- on 10/01/2009 12:00 pm

"Hell, I had high hopes for the Friday the 13th remake, but... ugh. Jason's mom as a flowing white ghost on a horse?"

Vault Master, you're confusing the Friday the 13th remake with the new "Halloween 2" film.

"The only part I REALLY hated about it was Freddy yelling "I didn't do it" at the beginning."

Jimbob Jones, I'm hoping that's not them changing the story, I'm hoping it's Freddy LYING about what he did as he's being chased down in a desperate attempt to get them to leave him alone. That's the only way it would make sense to me, because yeah, to have him be an innocent man who was murdered who obviously piss all over the original storyline.

User avatar

dextire on 10/01/2009 12:58 pm

In regards to the Prom Night remake, I have no idea what they were thinking with that one. It was like a kid's movie. I really don't know why it was even PG-13.

Something great did come out of it though: "Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II" finally came to DVD!
Michael Ironside, demonic possession, and a girl getting pulled into and drowning in a chalk board. Truly awesome 80s horror.

User avatar

Hanglyman on 10/01/2009 1:30 pm

Michael Bay = Guaranteed suck.

That said, it's actually not bad for a trailer... they used the children's song (this is absolutely mandatory for a trailer of a Nightmare on Elm Street remake), it all seems to be somewhat faithful to the original concept, and there's some interesting imagery that intrigues me. Too bad the movie won't come anywhere near fulfilling all that promise.


Igotmitz (Guest) on 10/01/2009 2:07 pm

Is it just me, or does anyone else think/know if itll be a hybrid of the first and second movies? That pool scene looks like NOES 2, which was, in my opinion one of the best NOES scenes.

User avatar

DrewP on 10/01/2009 3:58 pm

I am reserving judgment; because last year at 2008's Dragon Con here in GA I met Robert Englund and asked him what he thought about the remake, and he seemed generally excited about it. He also seemed to enjoy what they were doing with the script. Doesn't mean I am not worried though...

User avatar

HowardC on 10/01/2009 4:26 pm

Makeup looks terrible. Voice is terrible. Claw looks like and oversized cartoon version of the original claw. I mean for god sakes they did that stuff ON PURPOSE to parody freddy in new nightmare, why in the world would they do that on a supposed "serious" remake? Also my guess is they DID change the opening plot just to make freddy more of a "hero" then he already was. After all bay shits all over villian storylines and gives all the good stuff to heroes in a picture. Makes me wonder how he could possibly be involved in a horror movie. So I'm gonna pass on this one. Robet Englund is and always will be freddy and re-casting him is the biggest mistake since they re-cast dracula from Bella.

Also DrewP:

If I'm not mistaken in 2008 Englund was still a viable option in terms of casting so he might have said that in hopes they'd re-cast him as freddy.

User avatar

sonicteam3000 on 10/01/2009 6:02 pm

i didn't like freddy, the voice is very similar to the Joker's [in my opinion] basically this is the original script with a diffirent cast with some twist. i give it a three and a half.

User avatar

Desert_Screams on 10/01/2009 7:44 pm

Michael Bay's previous horror drive-bys had all sorts of problems in terms of their faithfulness to the source material, or the casting of really annoying, really pretty young people as the so-called "heroes" of the films, but at the end of the day it was hard to fault the work of actors like Derek Mears (the new Jason) or Andrew Bryniarski (the new Leatherface), because their characters contained enough elements of a blank slate to allow for new, different approaches.

The problem that Freddy Krueger presents is that he's not "some guy in a mask," he's a completely realized performance by a professional actor who spent more than a little time creating a persona to go with the look. (The same could be said for Doug Bradley's Pinhead character: read Bradley's wonderful book SACRED MONSTERS if you ever think these horror stars don't take the genre and its history seriously.) Robert Englund didn't take a turn at playing Freddy; he created the character as we think of him, and have thought of him for twenty-five years now. If the look isn't his, or the voice, or the walk, it won't register as the character.

The counter-argument is usually something along the lines of, "Well, iconic characters are done and re-done all the time, look at Dracula," but that doesn't take into account that about twenty-five years elapsed between Lugosi and Lee, or between Lee and Oldman. The Englund-to-Haley hand-off (glove-off?) is a space of about only five years-- no time at all in cinematic terms. The gut reaction from fans will be "No Englund, no Freddy," but history has shown us that Bay & Co. couldn't care less what the fans think.

And even if I did lean toward a more charitable assessment of Haley's casting, one scene in the trailer pretty much kills the movie for me: the scene where Freddy's running and screaming that he didn't do what they think he did. This seems to indicate they went with the script treatment where Krueger was framed, which will prove to be the funniest single moment in revisionist horror history since trailer-park Michael Myers sat down on the curb to the tune of "Love Hurts" in Zombie's HALLOWPALOOZA.

User avatar

DrewP on 10/01/2009 8:30 pm


Actually he told me he was glad he wasn't asked to be in it as he felt he was getting to old for the part.


Shane Skekel (Guest) on 10/01/2009 9:15 pm

Here's some suggestions:
1. Instead of bitching incessantly; why not watch the original?
2. If you want to see a truly original film; go watch a little-known CGI film from 2004 called Ark.


Shane Williams (Guest) on 10/01/2009 10:34 pm

I thought this trailer sucked

then I saw terror on elm street :D

User avatar

HowardC on 10/01/2009 10:39 pm


That sucks that he's got a case of the "I"m too olds". Freddy vs Jason was probably the most action-oriented appearance of Freddy yet and he did a fantastic job on it.

Desert Screams:

While I agree that the new actors in these remakes do a really good job the problem is all teh acting in the world doesn't save a bad script. For an example see the legendary Harrison Ford in movies such as six days and firewall. ;)

Also I don't think your examples of comparing Freddy to characters such as dracula is particularly relevant for a few reasons. (Including the ones you already gave.) First off Dracula is from a 100+ year old book, so even the first film was a movie adaptation. Freddy was supposed to be a low budget one shot horror flick, so Englund single-handedly carried the entire franchise after the first flim when the scripts got a little questionable. Also the fact of the matter is that over the years iconic roles do get recast it is universally 100% the case that the original actor is always the favorite.

Polls on every end of the spectrum have been done over the years and in every instance Bella is overwhealmingly the favorite dracula, karloff the favorite monster, ect... Hell this is the case even in other genres as Connery is the fav bond.

It could be argued that after an actor dies/gets too old that we need to re-cast to continue the legacy of the story. Unfortunately history shows us that this is futile and lightning rarely strikes twice. Look at all of the serious dracula sequels/remakes over the past 70 years and tell me you would miss ANY of them if they never happened. The answer should be, no, you would not. With the exception of perhaps Bram Stoker's Dracula, they have all been worthless. Look what was done with Frankenstein over the same period. With the exception of Young Frankenstein, which is a spoof, we've got jack. How about the mummy? Well all the sequels involved mindless rubber suit zombies. Werewolf? Well the concept of werewolves, much like vampires only came into their own once they buried the Talbot character and just concentrated on the creature itself.

And remember, these characters were classic literary figures and have had over half a decade to produce content. Some of these remakes involve franchises that are less than 30 years old and aren't exactly great works of literature.

I'm just saying the whole concept of re-casting is pointless as the audience always cements the original actor into the role unless they do a really terrible job.

I agree btw, the fire scene killed it for me as well. It's not even so much the fact that he might be innocent, it's the fact that he's scared and is running like a bitch. Freddy, even the human freddy was always PROUD of his crimes. He barely even flinched when they burned him alive, he WELCOMED it. It helped to establish just how sick, just how unfeeling and as a result just how scary freddy was. He was a monster BEFORE he became the dream master. Even if he was lying as Rog suggested it doesn't change the fact that this new freddy is (GAG!) human.

That's end-game for me.

User avatar

dewman on 10/01/2009 10:55 pm

Clancy Brown's greatest role is and always will be Eugene Krabs.

User avatar

Vault Master on 10/02/2009 2:55 am

Vault Master, you're confusing the Friday the 13th remake with the new "Halloween 2" film.

Arg, you're right. I was just so irritated by the whiny, "I didn't do it" Freddy that I couldn't think straight.

Good lookin' out though. ;)

I still contend that his mom on a horse was retarded and extraneous. Like making Police Acadamy movies without Guttenberg.


Mewchu (Guest) on 10/02/2009 10:47 am

Personally I think the "I DIDN'T DO IT" Freddy may be just a ruse to get the parents to stop chasing him (ie: he is guilty) or later on in the film he'll say something like "I'm killing you to get back at your parents for what they did to me" or something.

BTW, things change. Change is eventual and cannot be stopped. Stop being so jaded, I mean you'll still have the old movie to go back to if this one sucks. It's not like the franchise is your skin, you don't have to worry about it getting "infected".

And for everyone who says "NO ONE CARES ABOUT THE REAL HORROR FANS ANYMORE", well whenever they DO make a movie that caters to you, the sales are horrible because the demographic is smaller, only half that demographic shows up, and they all post negative reviews if one iota of something isn't "oldschool" enough leaving the movie companies to say "WE JUST CAN'T PLEASE THESE GUYS" and go back to pleasing the easily pleased, ie: the teenage movie-going crowd which incidentally is who they were trying to please in 1984. Your parents hated the new horror movies back then just like you guys hate the new movies today. The teenagers don't give a f*ck, just like you back then. They just go to have a good time and get scared, and when they make their nostalgia sites, they're going to be paying homage to these remakes you hate, and hating on the remakes of the remakes.

It's change, it happens, and all the bitching on all the message boards won't do a thing to fix it.

User avatar

Vault Master on 10/03/2009 1:18 am

That would be a valid argument if not for two things, Mewchu.

1. Our parents didn't all hate horror movies. I got my love of the genre from my mom and dad, and they also agree that these remakes are terrible.

Despite huge advancements in film tech and insane budgets to finance them, these films are banal to say the least, eye candy to say the most, and very few of them actually have a cast that's worth anything. You get no names from these movies that go on to do anything decent, unlike the classics that have such huge stars as , Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, Christopher Lee, Jamie Lee Curtis, Kurt Russell, Bruce Campbell, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

To prove my point, let me ask you... do you even know who Jensen Ackles is? No? No cheating with Google either.

Exactly, no one knows, even though he starred in one of the year's most talked about horror re-makes, My Bloody Valentine.

I mean, you might know him if you're down with Sweet Valley High or Cybill or Days of Our Lives.

But if that's the case, that's a can of worms you need to deal with on your own.

and 2.

I seriously doubt anyone will be making as big an homage to these remakes as the originals.

They just don't have the staying power. Not to mention that younger generations have the attention span of a goldfish.

The reason people make tribute sites and things is because the movies were entertaining and memorable. None of these remakes are memorable.


But hey, on the bright side, not all rip-flicks have to be gold. That's where we get our mocking material from most of the time. It's fun to bag on bad movies. I just don't think it's fun to make older, good movies, into newer "For teh bux" movies, in order to do so. It sullies their legacy.

User avatar

Durrsomething on 10/03/2009 5:21 am

So now freddy's a pimple-faced brat terrorizing Pittsburgh while fighting the guy who voices Lex Luthor and Mr. Krabs?

Bullshit. What next? A Child's Play remake with Eddie Murphy as the voice of Chucky?

User avatar

Just Ami on 10/04/2009 3:55 am

I HATE remakes. D: So tired of this disrespecting crap that just seems more and more popular.

Yes, of course.. it's just a teaser and you can't judge too harshly on just a teaser...


I feel that looked like shit. Makes me so angry I can't even type a coherent rant at the moment. D:

User avatar

Drew Bludd on 10/04/2009 4:39 am

I like his new face and voice.

I'm looking forward to this remake which is something I never thought I'd say.


Sean Scotto (Guest) on 10/04/2009 12:34 pm

I stopped watching the preview after "PRODUCED BY MICHAEL BAY" popped up on the screen.


Joey (Guest) on 10/04/2009 5:45 pm

No Robert Englund. No puns. No pizza or video game-themed violence.

It doesn't look good.

User avatar

testtube on 10/05/2009 3:24 pm

I'm kind of bummed out by this but I know that none of these remakes hold any lasting power. I was worried about them overshadowing the originals around the time of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Dawn of The Dead remakes but there are no devoted fanbases around these movies like there are the originals.

After the seriously weak Friday The 13th remake, which no one is talking about, I got an idea how tedious and unsatisfying this will turn out.


Glen (Guest) on 10/05/2009 5:27 pm

I personally liked the trailer. Loved the old-school glove scraping and seeing the shadowy Freddy again, rather than having him tossed out in our faces like Nightmare 4 was. I like a dark, shadowy Freddy and how they seem to be trying to make him scary again, rather than the reviled jokester he was in Freddy's Dead : The Final Nightmare. (Don't get me wrong, I love Freddy, but the makeup and the butterknives glove SUCKED!)

All in all I want this to succeed, but I am waiting until I see the final release before I praise or pan too much.


Amanda (Guest) on 10/05/2009 7:20 pm

Hi, Can i take a one small photo from your blog? Thanks!


Qreg (Guest) on 10/05/2009 8:37 pm

1.) They can NOT make Freddy a sympathetic innocent victim-type villain. It doesn't work and just begs for plot holes. For instance: if he was really a child murder why does the iconic little ghost girl have a slash across his chest? Because it looks creepy? Give me a break Platinum Dunes.

2.) The overlooked negative about these remakes is that they needlessly kill off the original series. Take the Friday remake. Would anyone have noticed if they'd stuck an 11 on the end instead of calling it a "re imagining". It was by-the-numbers in relation to the rest with absolutely nothing original or innovative. But because Bay and his goons had to follow a trend we will never get anymore true Friday movies or Nightmare movies.

3.) Apart from all that the trailer doesn't look bad. Just average and completely formulaic.

User avatar

testtube on 10/06/2009 8:31 am

After watching it again, no, gay gay gay gay, RED FUCKING FLAG, that new Freddy fucking sucks, I hope his head changes or anything remotely creative happens in the movie, and you know it won't, its going to be very STREAMLINED and PLAIN AS HELL, and yet knowing this many will accept it. That Freddy's face looks very NU-Saw or whatever, its completely shitty. Having someone float above their bed and get slashed up was cutting edge in the 80s, you think with dreams being your inner mind and all you would see something far more bizarre and horrific especially with todays effects. One can only dream


Jimbo (Guest) on 10/06/2009 4:22 pm

I think a lot of you are being too nice, while Haleys performance may yet be great, the new look of Freddy is awful, it looks like shit, as for the image one of the precious posters..uh...posted, that image had been proven fake.

User avatar

lil’ms’krueger on 10/10/2009 11:45 am

Is this the real trailer?
I think I may cry!!
Whats with Freddys voice?
And his human form is wimpy!
And his looks!!!

I'm gonna burst into tears, he ain't burnt enough and his mouth looks like a fish!!
I am seriously dissapointed with Mr Michael Bay, loved his Transformer films but this is just BAD!! I want Robert Back!! x

User avatar

whoareyou on 10/11/2009 4:00 pm

The only problem with being sternly against remakes is you occasionaly get a real winner (John Carpenter's the Thing) I'll go see this, I want to go see it, To be honest it's bound to be better than 5 or 6. Just like no matter how shitty Rob Zombie's Halloween was (and it was) it was still better than H20 or Ressurection. No one complains much about the glut of horror sequels but bitch non-stop about producers hitting reset on a series.


KRis (Guest) on 10/13/2009 2:00 pm

I don't normally like remakes either...but SHIT, im just happy to see nightmare on elm street back!!! I've always been a fan...and even if it sucks, at least it's NOT ANOTHER FUCKING SAW MOVIE!!! HOLY SHIT! THEY ALL SUCK! sorry for the outburst.

Leave a Reply

Available BBCode: [b] = bold, [i] = italics, [u] = underline,
[img] = insert image, [url] = insert hyperlink. See the full list.

Previous post: “Chill To Thrill” Color Changing Ghosts Mini Halloween Soda Cans!
Next post: Two Halloween Contests Ending Soon! Plus, An Interview At SC3!