1, 2, Freddy's re-made for you...

You know what? I liked it. More than that, dare I say, I enjoyed it a little more than it's original ancestor.

                                                         "What did you just say, bitch?"

            I SAID, I ENJOYED THIS MOVIE!!!

Before I get pelted with criticism and "HOW DAR U!1!" messages, please hear me out.

I saw the original Elm Street when I was 24 years old, and by then, I had just about seen it all in terms of horror/gore/suspense. Hostel made me flinch in some moments, I got a buzz (tee hee) from the first Sawand my perceptions about what was real and what was not changed when I watched the magnificent Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me. So when I slapped Craven's seminal classic into the DVD player, I wasn't scared or shocked. Now please don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and I thought that Robert Englund is revered by horror lovers quite rightly. The movie on it's own is worth a watch by any and all horror fans. Even if they don't like it, at least they were able to watch it and make a decision for themselves. The dream sequences were trippy and the blood-letting was abundant, but at no moment did my jaded mind feel frightened of Kruger or his pointy friends.

On the other hand, we live in a world where movie remakes are panned before they are even released. I remember when a then-unknown Zack Snyder announced he would be doing a 're-imagining' of Dawn of the Dead, I kinda rolled my eyes until I decided to see it out of curiousity when it was released. And it blew me away. Big time. Same thing with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre with Jessica 'Tighty Heiny' Biel. I really enjoyed that one because of how it didn't pull any punches. Oddly enough, I watched Tobe Hoopers' milestone afterward and save for those iconic moments featuring Leatherface and his beloved chainsaw, I was very underwhelmed. These days, I tend to give remakes a benefit of the doubt- I will watch it and decide for myself. Goodness me, I AM getting more mature as a film-goer, whoda thunk?!

Which brings me to approaching 2010's re-imagining, re-jigging, re-whatever you wanna call it of A Nightmare on Elm Street which for the first time is Robert Englund-less. Recently re-emerging actor Jackie Earle Haley received the honor of the role and quite frankly? I thought he worked a lot more as Freddy.

                                                              "Bitch, I'll gut you!"


Wait, wait, hold your horses, I'm not done yet.


When I say I preferred Haley's Freddy more to Englund's I'm talking about the original, menacing, down-to-business Freddy. See, even in his first incarnation, Englund's Freddy didn't quite have what it took to be truly unsettling. Later as the series progressed, he became more endearing- we didn't WANT him to die, we wanted him to continue stalking those silly sex-crazed, dope-headed teens. He's like a rebellious friend who will noisily pull up your driveway at midnight, beep the horn and be singing at the top of his lungs dirty limerics about nuns.

                                                Plus, he's so darn cute in doll form


While Englund will always be Pop Culture King Freddy, he was never the Freddy the original should have been- a cold, calculating, violator of children. While the remake doesn't get into the gritty details of Freddy's dealings with minors (thankfully so at that), you still get the heavy notion that he thinks young people are the perfect prey- they think they are young and indefatigable, but Freddy knows a lot better and gets them where they are at their most vulnerable- in their dreams. He plays on their fears and their minds by making them suffer insomnia for so long until they have no choice but to collapse from exhustion. Then in this weakened state, he preys maliciously on them, assaulting their bodies and psyches. That is pure sadism, folks. When Haley's Krueger tortures his victims, he isn't a loquatious man about town- he devours them slowly like a spider, making sure they feel everything.


                                     
                                                    Don't fall asleep in class, kiddies


Addtionally, while Haley is slighter in stature compared to Englund, his robust form works to his advantage- Kruger is a burnt, deformed demonic looking boogeyman. A face of nightmares personified.
Another factor that works in this Freddy's case is the make up which actually looks closer to a burn victim than Englund, which, at least in my eyes, works a lot better for selling the character's appearance and his motivations of revenge. You can almost taste the burnt flesh, bad breath and decomposition by looking at him.

                                                                      Hello, ladies


Now as for the movie itself... well, let's put it this way in terms of remakes: on one end you have Dawn of the Dead, TCM, and yes, even Piranah 3D, on the other side you get Prom Night, Sorority Row, Black Christmas and Gus Van Sant's senseless shot by shot of Psycho. In the middle you have offerings like NOES. While, save for some choice dream/micro-nap sequences and inventive blood-letting it offers nothing new, but at the same time, it's hardly a crime against cinema that is to be vilified to the end of time. In fact, aside from a few weak performances (one of them being from Rooney Mara's dreary Nancy), the acting ain't too shabby either. It was also refreshing to see that this movie wasn't subjected to the dreaded PG-13 curse and it was allowed to at least dip it's toe in a few nasty situations involving child molestation and murder.


 All in all, while it will not be considered a classic as it's original predecessor, NOES ala 2010 isn't a bad way to spend an hour and 30 minutes in front of a television on Friday night.

                                          "You were lucky this time, bitch. Sweet dreams."