Perturbadora, escalofriante y aterrorizante como la primera vez que me la ví. Así parecer ser A Nightmare On Elm Street versión Samuel Bayer y producida por Michael Bay.

Ya he visto otros clásicos del terror producidos por Bay y han sido bastante aceptables. Hay rumores de una versión de The Birds de Hitchcock pero creo que sólo serán pérdidas.

Llamo la atención de este avance tan sólo porque la peli original de Wes Craven en 1984 fue miedosa, apareció Johnny Depp y fue la máxima estelaridad de Robert Englund (quién tan sólo fue uno de los alienígenas bonachones en V: The Final Battle también en 1984 y de quién sólo he visto que haya logrado recientemente un protagónico en una peli de serie b titulada Zombie Strippers!).

Pero esta peli tiene un ingrediente especial y es Jackie Earle Haley como Freddy Krueger un excelente actor que incluso fue nominado al Oscar de La Academia por Little Children (peli que tengo en remojo para otra entrada). La iré a ver por él, el director, Samuel Bayer aunque tiene en su portafolio dirección varios videos musicales, es un total desconocido para mi.

Mucha suerte entonces para Haley.

Jackie Earle Haley (Freddy Krueger)

New in at Cinema Books:Hollywood Monster a Walk Down Elm Stree with the Man of Your Dreams by Robert Englund with Alan Goldsher, $26.00 cloth. Legendary horror  icon “Freddy Krueger” tells all in this veteran actor’s memoir of his life in Hollywood. Introductions by Wes Craven and Tobe Hopper. Time to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniverary of Nightmare on Elm Street.

Splatter, slasher, robot cannibali, ultraviolenza, alieni iracondi, gore, tutti sottogeneri cinematografici in cui la violenza la fa da padrona, ma quali sono i film più truculenti di sempre? Ecco a voi, repressi amici di Alt(R)a Fedeltà, la classifica definitiva dei film più atroci di sempre, roba da chiudere gli occhi e implorare la pietà del vostro lettore DVD.

5) “Wolf Creek” di Greg McLean (2004)

Due ragazzi e una ragazza si ritrovano nel deserto Australiano (Parco nazionale di Wolf Creek appunto) per una gita di piacere: dopo aver scoperto che la macchina li ha abbandonati a sé stessi scopriranno (Peggio ancora) che quella sarà tutto tranne che una gita di piacere, grazie al prezioso aiuto di un maniaco sadico stupratore trovato sul posto. Il tocco finale? E’ una storia vera, e non si hanno notizie su come siano andate davvero le cose, l’unico sopravvissuto potrebbe anche (Nella vita vera…cazzo) essersi inventato tutto e aver massacrato impunemente le proprie compagne di viaggio. Attori sconosciuti, semiprofessionisti, violenza da professionisti veri. Consigliatissimo, è pure un bel film, il che non guasta.

4) “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” di Tobe Hooper (1974)

Un classicissimo dell’horror e dell’ultraviolenza. Dopo più di 30 dalla sua uscita al cinema ben pochi film possono giocarsela con questo delirante viaggio nella campagna texana, ispirato dai delitti di Ed Gein. Una gita pomeridiana che si trasforma in un viaggio nel terrore più profondo, il personaggio di Leatherface, l’idea di fondo di una vicenda non troppo lontana dalla realtà. Un grande classico che come il buon vino invecchiando migliora. Vale quanto detto per Wolf Creek: gran film, dev’essere visto. (Tra le altre cose l’immagine a sinistra è una delle più belle inquadrature della storia del cinema Horror…)

3) “I Spit on Your Grave” di Meir Zarchi (1978)

Alt(R)a Fedeltà è lieta di presentarvi il rape-revenge movie per eccellenza. Conosciuto in Italia con il delicatissimo titolo Non violentate Jennifer, oltre ad aggiudicarsi il premio speciale come opera più mutilata della storia dalla censura, si candida anche alla medaglia d’oro per la violenza gratuita. La vicenda narra di una giovane scrittrice che, dopo essersi trasferita in un delizioso paesino rurale della provincia Americana, viene violentata e torturata da quattro ragazzotti del posto: la sua vendetta non si farà attendere. Zarchi sceglie di non utilizzare alcuna colonna sonora per lasciare lo spettatore ancor più in balia della freddezza e della crudezza delle immagini; discutibile (A dir poco) la scelta di incentrare il film sulle sevizie del titolo Italiano (Quasi mezz’ora, raccapricciante) e dedicare alla vendetta della giovane una porzione piccola e distratta del film. Non l’abbiamo visto, ci teniamo a sottolinearlo, dubito lo vedremo mai.

2) “L’ultima casa a sinistra” di Wes Craven (1972)

Ben prima di Freddy e Jason, Wes Craven e Sean Cunningham si presero a braccetto per realizzare un caposaldo del moderno Horror. Violenza, omicidi, vendetta: un mix virtuoso di “I spit on your grave” e l’originale de “Le colline hanno gli occhi” (Dello stesso Craven), considerando che le storyline dei tre film si somigliano parecchio…

Forsenontuttisannoche: il film è in pratica un Remake horror (Diciamo una rilettura) di quel capolavoro indiscutibile che risponde al nome de “La Fontana della Vergine” di Bergman.

Innumerevoli versioni ed edizioni del film sono reperibili su DVD, VHS, Super8, una vera manna per i collezionisti, a causa dei diversi e numerosissimi tagli imposti dalla censura. Scegliete dunque il livello di violenza che più vi aggrada!

1) “Cannibal Holocaust” di Ruggero Deodato (1979)

Quattro giovani reporter sono incaricati di girare un documentario sulle tribù cannibali amazzoniche, incredibile a dirsi, riusciranno a superarne le gesta, e la loro dipartita sarà salutata dagli spettatori con un’ovazione da stadio. Un film assurdo, scene da delirio mentale (La ragazza indigena impalata, la tartaruga e il topo sventrati in presa diretta, il neonato nel fango…) è considerato il più famoso e controverso film del genere cannibal. Alla sua uscita generò gigantesche (E per una volta, giuste) polemiche, per le vere uccisioni di animali e per il realismo di alcune scene, tanto che lo si credette uno snuff movie: per questo motivo fu intentata una causa contro il regista. Il film rafforzò la fama di Deodato come autore estremo, dopo il precedente Ultimo mondo cannibale, e gli valse l’appellativo Monsieur Cannibal, datogli dai francesi, oltre a quello di imbecille, datogli da noi. Evitatelo, è davvero troppo.

FILME: QUADRILHA DE SÁDICOS

Título Original: The Hills Have Eyes
Gênero: Terror
Duração: 89 minutos
Ano de Lançamento: (EUA) 1977
Estúdio: Blood Relations Co.
Distribuidora: Vanguard
Direção: Wes Craven
Roteiro: Wes Craven
Produção: Peter Locke
Elenco
Susan Lanier (Brenda Carter)
Robert Houston (Bobby Carter)
Martin Speer (Doug Wood)
Dee Wallace (Lynne Wood)
Russ Grieve (Big Bob Carter)
John Steadman (Fred)
James Whitworth (Jupiter)
Virginia Vincent (Ethel Carter)
Lance Gordon (Mars)
Michael Berryman (Pluto)
Janus Blythe (Ruby)
Cordy Clark (Mama)
Brenda Marinoff (Katy)
Peter Locke (Mercury)
Sinopse: Durante uma viagem de carro pela Califórnia, a família Carter resolveu pegar um atalho. Foi a sua desgraça. Eles encontraram um grupo de canibais que transformou suas vidas num pesadelo infernal.

Comentário: filme totalmente alternativo, início de carreira de Wes Craven. A história é um pouco clichê, mas a edição e o suspense dão conta do filme. Ganhou uma refilmagem pelo mesmo diretor em 1996.

MÚSICA: LA ROUX – I’M NOT YOUR TOY

Brilliant. Time to talk about our Ten lists once more, so settle in for the long haul and try and keep up. Much discussion ensues as Sam tries to extol the virtues of Ingmar Bergman, praise the magical realism of Billy Liar and attempt to make sense of All About Lily Chou-Chou. John continues the theme, causing slight, though understandable, consternation with his uncensored views on Raging Bull and confessions of multiple tears during Schindler’s List. Tom rounds the night off in business-like fashion with praise for The 400 Blows, controversial dislike for the second half of Stalker and man-crushed love for Le Samourai.

Download The Movie Overdose Episode 40.5

Remember to email us, sugarplums!

- por Bernardo Brum

Quando se distanciou do mundo do cinema e passou a dirigir séries de televisão e peças de teatro,  a desculpa dada por Bergman era que estava horrorizado com a baixeza atual do cinema. Sempre me pergunto se um dos motivos principais foi ter visto o que um certo cineasta americano fez usando a história que o sueco havia criado para o filme A Fonte da Donzela…

Pois é, Aniversário Macabro transforma uma clássica história de sofrimento, dor e tristeza em um autêntico exploitation sujo, brutal e doentio. Na cadeira de direção, Wes Caven, um dos mais malucos cineastas do gênero e que, com o passar dos anos, iria progressivamente amolecer e passar a dirigir filmes mais levinhos como a trilogia de terror teen Pânico e o draminha água-com-açúcar Música do Coração, e é claro, o criador do vilão Freddy Krueger e diretor do primeiro A Hora do Pesadelo.

Mas lá pelos idos do começo dos anos 70, o papo era bem diferente. Junto ao produtor Sean S. Cunningham (que, anos mais tarde, criaria a mais rentável cópia de Halloween, Sexta-Feira 13) e egresso da pornografia (como tantos outros cineastas do seu período que passariam a ser mais cohecidos como grandes potências do cinema americano – como Abel Ferrara, só para citar um exemplo), Craven acabou sendo reconhecido como um dos cineastas mais extremos da época. Outros filmes que iria dirigir, como Quadrilha de Sádicos e declarações que ele próprio não aguentava assistir seu debut no cinema de horror só serviram perpetuar a lenda.

A história de Bergman é subvertida logo nos primeiros cinco minutos, aonde a inocente protagonista de seu filme é transformada numa libidinosa moça típica do estereótipo daquele década. Ao invés de ir levar velas para a igreja, ela sai com uma amiga no seu aniversário para ir num show de rock e comprar maconha. Ao invés de encontrar pastores pagãos, ela é estuprada e assassinada por uma gangue clichê de psicopatas lideradas pelo amedrontador Krug Stillo (interpretado pelo ator David Hess, dono de uma expressão de psicótico-demente poucas vezes igualada).

Essas são as premissas básicas para um filme nem um pouco sutil e praticamente sem concessões. Não adianta desviar os olhos da violência para outra coisa, já que aqui, a violência é a mola-mestra da película. Ela que dita a estética suja e doente, a edição meio Peckinpah e a história, que se não é muito original, deixa pra lá a história de vingança, culpa e redenção do filme original e pega os pais da protagonista para revidarem de forma igualmente animalesca.

Aniversário Macabro é um exploitation por excelência, e as próprias aliviadas que o cineasta dá só acabam atrapalhando tudo – tipo a inserção de uma dupla de policiais palermas que passam grande parte do filme em trapalhadas à lá Os Três Patetas enquanto o pau come solto e rolam estupros, desmembramentos , assassinatos  e humilhações mil. Assim como a apresentação dos antagonistas – caricata demais para se levar a sério e óbvia sacanagem do diretor para com o espectador – que acabam deixando o filme, no final das contas,  sem todo o impacto que poderia causar.

Mas mesmo com o pézinho na auto-esculhambação desnecessária, não se deixe enganar – o filme é pauleira pura que compete de igual para igual com qualquer um dos clássicos hiperviolentos da época. O ato final é um dos mais malucos e alucinados que o filão poderia oferecer – inclusive inaugurando o uso de uma motoserra no cinema de horror  antes de Leatheface e Tobe Hooper a popularizarem de forma definitiva.

Histórico-socialmente falando, o filme é um reflexo da sua época – uma época desiludida, onde os Estados Unidos voltavam desiludidos da guerra do Vietnã, o tráfico de heroína subia de forma vertiginosa, ocorriam o escândalo de Watergate, a era hippie chegava ao final com Altamont e os brutais assassinatos da Família Manson e o mundo se via numa época que, a qualquer minuto, poderia acabar nas cinzas de uma fogueira nuclear. Com isso, nem dava para fazer algo mais elaborado – a urgência e o sensacionalismo eram o que ditava os filmes. Com isso tudo, o grito de Craven foi mais do que válido. Tanto que, até hoje, continua sendo impressionante.

3/5

Ficha técnica: Aniversário Macabro (Last House on The Left) – 1972, EUA. Dir.: Wes Craven. Elenco: Sandra Peabody, Lucy Grantham, David Hess.

La ex Diva WWE, Stacy Keibler ganó el “Baltimore Celebrity Smackdown”, concurso, que se celebró en la página web del Baltimore Sun en los últimos meses. 64 personalidades locales, “Que llaman a Baltimore su casa” participaron en la competenciam, siendo votados por los lectores del periódico

La vistoria es reelavante, pues entre las personalidades se encontraban nombres muy conocidos, como las cantantes Tori Amos y Toni Braxton, el líder de los Talking Heads, David Byrne, el famoso director de cintas de terror: Wes Craven, y la actríz Linda Hamilton (Terminator)

Scream: looking back, this film is totally bizarre. A horror movie about ‘teens’ being aware that they’re living out a stereotypical slasher scenario. Aimed at fans of the genre it’s full of clichés and a classic horror references; both explicitly and through visual homage. Although it’s very gory the humor and self-referencing irony ruins the potential scariness of the film. The high level of ‘borrowed’ content also detracts from how unique the concept of scream was. Ultimately, it became the phenomenon that kick-started a new wave of horror films (& parodies) and although it’s a bit self-indulgent, I take my hat off to Craven for continually pushing the envelope. It also left me wondering what ever happened to the perky Neve Campbell and Rose McGowan? An instant classic that’s entertaining, original, quotable and is ingrained in so many peoples brains all these years on. There’s word on Scream 4 coming out next year, better dig out your box set! Do you like scary movies?

Score 7/10

Con la noticia de que una década después del lanzamiento en cines de Scream, se está produciendo la cuarta parte estelarizada por un asesino con máscara ridícula, las voces y opiniones no se han dejado esperar.

Acaba de salir a la luz la imagen del cartel publicitario de la cinta y, al verlo, me doy cuenta que esta cinta va a apestar tanto o más como lo hicieran las partes anteriores. Baste ver las pocas ganas que le echaron para diseñarlo, ni siquiera hay un buen manejo de luces para que la máscara se vea más apantallante. Triste que se cuelguen sólo de la fama ganada.

Brilliant. Time to talk about our Ten lists once more, so settle in for the long haul and try and keep up. Much discussion ensues as Sam tries to extol the virtues of Ingmar Bergman, praise the magical realism of Billy Liar and attempt to make sense of All About Lily Chou-Chou. John continues the theme, causing slight, though understandable, consternation with his uncensored views on Raging Bull and confessions of multiple tears during Schindler’s List. Tom rounds the night off in business-like fashion with praise for The 400 Blows, controversial dislike for the second half of Stalker and man-crushed love for Le Samourai.

Download The Movie Overdose Episode 40.5

Remember to email us, sugarplums!

MTV continues to get these great exclusives. Scream writer Kevin Williamson caught up with the music/reality television channel and reveals a couple of interesting tidbits for the upcoming Scream 4.

“The fourth one is an ensemble…It’ll take place right now, 10 years later, and it’s going to take place in [Sidney Prescott's hometown of] Woodsboro. We’ll have our three main characters…We’ll also be introducing a little group, a little ensemble of new castmembers. That’ll take us through the next three.”

So a new trilogy has been confirmed. Ehh, could be worse, it could be I Know What You Did Last Summer or Urban Legend. The trinity (Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox Arquette and David Arquette) are all confirmed to return, while series director Wes Craven has only expressed interest in returning.

NO HOMO.

the mark of the beast
savage werewolves in LA
LOOK OUT! IT’S PACEY!

Okej, update av Scream 4. Filmen påbörjar en ny trilogi. Vi undrar hur författaren Kevin Williamson som gjorde ett bra manus till första filmen Scream, och sabbade sin trilogi med mediokra manuset till filmen Scream 3, ska orka med att skriva till en hel ny Scream-trilogi. Handling? Läs detta  lysande synopsi som offentliggjorts:

The horror series that reignited the genre and grossed more than $500 million worldwide is back! From Kevin Williamson, creator of the original Scream trilogy, the new film sees the return of cast members Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox, and David Arquette along with a group of new stars, who can all hopefully stay alive long enough to figure out the new rules to this one-of-a-kind horror franchise!

Yeah right! Det låter ju som om hela berättelsen är klar. En galning och lite mord – samt bäste vännen som är mördaren. Nyskapande värre va?

Inte ens Wes Craven vill vara med längre. Vem ska ta över regissörstronen? Inget är bestämt. Franchise-hysterin i hollywood håller på att gå över styr. Nu kan du köpa rättigheterna till ex. Terminator och göra en egen film – Om du har råd.

Scream 4

Läs mer i AB
Eller varför inte hos MTV
Eller läs mer om filmen här i FilmMedia-Filmblogg :
Scream 4 blir 3D-scream med Neve Campbell

FilmMedia – Filmblogg

Here there is the first promotional poster for the new scream movie…About the cast, Courteney Cox, Neve Campbell, and David Arquette are all set to return, but beyond that, they haven’t even chose a director. We reported in October that Dimension was supposedly close to getting Wes Craven back to direct Scream 4-

The plot is nothing new, Mtv reported this: “The fourth one is an ensemble. It’ll take place right now, 10 years later, and it’s going to take place in [Sidney Prescott's hometown of] Woodsboro. We’ll have our three main characters, and we’ll be introducing several more. We’ll also be introducing a little group, a little ensemble of new castmembers. That’ll take us through the next three.”

Jeramie Rain starred in Wes Craven’s original LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT as Sadie, the killer sidekick to David Hess’ Krug. She later married Richard Dreyfuss, worked for NBC, and tried to help friend John Belushi get off drugs as documented in Bob Woodward’s Wired.

The actress told HARD FEELINGS that she was once picked up hitch-hiking by Tex Watson and Charles Manson. She stayed in the van after her friends were dropped off. The killers later showed up at her aunt’s house. And while making LAST HOUSE, Rain was playing Susan “Sadie” Atkins in an off-Broadway production.

In an even more bizarre Manson Family connection, Rain later lived in the Sharon Tate house on Cielo Drive. She learned from neighbors that the home was the site of the infamous August 9, 1969 murders only after moving in.

HARD FEELINGS also spoke to another Wes Craven star, Michael Berryman, who put the scary face and personality to Pluto in the original HILLS HAVE EYES. Berryman gave his opinion of the recent HILLS movies.

MB: I did see the remake of THE HILLS HAVE EYES, at a film festival. I went to a red carpet event and it was a lot of fun. You know, Wes and [producer] Peter Locke and I, we go way back, and it was so nice to be part of the premiere in L.A.

However, this film was made, and I don’t know why they made it. I do understand that remakes are popular, in some people’s assessments. For me personally, I actually liked the first fifteen to seventeen-and-a-half minutes. I was intrigued with the concept of a little town that was built by the Defense Department and where they had nuclear testing, because in the original, maybe we were mutants from that leftover radiation, et cetera.

But in the original, there wasn’t a lot of blood and gore. It was thrilling and compelling and frightening and threatening. And the families were pretty well-defined; each character was well-defined.

In the remakes, the characters were not well-defined. There was no back-story as to who they were, what they were, and why they did what they did. There was nothing to tell me even how they survived and how they managed to come up with these devices for dispatching people.

I just tell it like it is. Honestly, I felt that after the first 20 minutes, the movie turned into a gratuitous bloodbath; it was a video game. It was a push-the-button, shock-the-monkey splatter-fest, titillation for 14-year-olds. And I actually walked out of the film. It was terrible.

Then they did the sequel, and I was actually called to L.A. to meet the director [Alexandre Aja], who didn’t even bother to show up at the meeting. And I felt insulted; I felt depreciated. I paid my own expenses, and I’d sure like to have a check for $1,000 for those expenses.

I had a handshake deal with Peter Locke saying I’d be in Morocco. And the explanation I heard why I was not, when they were already in production in North Africa, was that Aja didn’t want anyone from the original. If that’s the case, then why did he bother to invite me to a meeting in the first place where he did not show up?

So, maybe I have a chip on my shoulder, maybe I’m getting grouchy in my old age, but you know, there’s something called respect, there’s something called courtesy, and something called professional behavior.

I’m glad the movie made some money, and I guess they made a part 3. More power to ya. Now that you’re fully funded, do something of quality and I‘ll go see it. And if it‘s good, I‘ll promote it.

But the remakes were terrible.

HF: Thank you. You don’t mind going on the record?

MB: HELL, NO!

Today’s Film: A Nightmare on Elm Street

Hit Theaters on November 16^th, 1984

Directed by Wes Craven

Notable Stars: Heather Langenkamp(Nancy Thompson), Johnny Depp (Glen Lantz), Robert Englund (Freddy Krueger), John Saxon (Lt. Thompson)

Here is a link to A Nightmare on Elm Street’s IMDB page

My Rating – ****1/2 (out of a possible 5 stars)

Synopsis:  Nancy Thompson and her friends are having trouble sleeping. A mysterious man with knifes for fingers is haunting their dreams. Nancy may be the only one that can stop the creepy, badly burned stranger, before it’s too late.

An Icon of our Generation?

It’s hard to imagine a world before Freddy Krueger. What must the first audience to watch “A Nightmare on Elm Street” have been thinking when Freddy’s knifed fingers first slashed across the screen, reflecting shimmering light and the fear on his victims’ faces? Was this unlike anything anyone had ever seen? Were people shocked? How has our view of nightmares changed since the creation of Freddy Krueger?

As a child I remember thinking that the Freddy movies where the ultimate horror films. As an adult, I’m impressed by the unique ground they cover and by their villain. No other villain can compare to Freddy Krueger. He is perhaps most terrifying in this first installment. In this film, Wes Craven presents him more as a boogeyman who we never get to spend a huge amount of time looking at. Plus, this is our first time experiencing the character of Nancy Thompson. To this day, I feel she is the only nemesis who was ever really worthy to beat Freddy one on one. Most other “Nightmare” heroines are poorly acted and badly written. But not Nancy.

A Brilliant Formula

A brilliant horror movie, like “A Nightmare on Elm Street”, tries to create the most authentic main character possible so that the audience feels like they are experiencing his/her’s realistic anxiety and fear. To further heighten this experience, certain horror films follow a very successful horror movie formula. In this formula, a horror film must strive to make the main character feel completely isolated and thus in greater danger. This is accomplished by removing three sources of comfort and support that exist in most everyday people’s lives. Take away our ability to rely on (1) god, (2) our mother, and (3) our friends, and we fall apart. The absence of these three staples leaves the main character, along with the audience, feeling totally alone. And then the true fear begins.

Your Mommy Can’t Help You…

Let’s break down how Wes Craven creates true fear in “A Nightmare on Elm Street”, using this same formula. First, Wes Craven destroys Nancy’s ability to turn to her mother by making her mother an alcoholic, mess who refuses to deal with the tragedies surrounding her daughter. Nancy’s mother was one of the parents who helped kill the mortal Fred Krueger. In a way, what is happening to her daughter is her fault. Imagine not being able to turn to the person who gave birth to you when something this horrible is happening.

Please, God…

Craven includes a few references to religion & God in his film. Tina calls out “Please, God” at one point. Freddy laughs this off and it becomes obvious that God won’t be saving anyone’s life in this movie.

Freddy haunting Nancy (1984)

In another scene, my favorite visual in the film, Freddy pushes himself through the wall above a bed Nancy is sleeping in. He knocks a crucifix off the wall, symbolizing that Jesus can’t keep Freddy from entering our lives either.

Friends to the End…

Finally, Wes Craven separates Nancy from her friends in three ways. First, they are unable to help each other because they are being killed off one by one by Freddy. Second, as the film progresses the audience witnesses several missed opportunities for the teenagers to talk about their dreams and learn from their common experiences. But, they try to pretend that Freddy isn’t real and this places a wedge between them and their ability to help each other. Lastly, sleep itself does a pretty good job of separating us. The true terror of Freddy Krueger is that he gets you when you sleep, and no one can stay awake forever. In one scene, Nancy attempts to rely on Glen, but he lets her down and falls asleep when he is supposed to be keeping watch. Nancy and the audience are left completely alone against Freddy Krueger.

The Original Ending

I’ve heard that Wes Craven had a totally different ending planned for this film. Originally Nancy defeats Freddy and gets her friends back. Basically, it is the existing ending to the film, minus the last 3 minutes where Freddy pops back up.

I’ve always been disappointed in the existing ending. As I’ve heard, Wes Craven admits in interviews he is also disappointed. Craven’s original ending was way better. Nancy is his only character that truly listens and learns throughout the film. She is a strong and resourceful heroine. In the end, she takes what she has learned and defeats Freddy. It turns out the seemingly indestructible Freddy has a weakness, and Nancy discovered it. She does what she was supposed to do, so she should win!

In the template for a properly structured horror film she would be rewarded for her hard work. This IS an expertly crafted, uniquely visual, properly structured horror film. But, as is so often the case, the money, the suits and the production company stepped in and broke the correct pattern. The kids get screwed in the end so that we will keep opening our wallets to see the sequels. No fault to Wes Craven, however. He did his job. And it is his vision, his directorial brilliance; his actors’ solid performances and good writing that have made this film stand the test of time as one of the classic horror greats!

Bottom Line:

“A Nightmare on Elm Street” delivers in all the ways a horror film should. There’s the appropriate amount of blood and gore, coupled with excellent performances and a solid script. Children are taught that dreams are filled with rainbows, cartoon characters and pleasant, talking animals. But in the world of Wes Craven, dreams are actually nightmares where your life is on the line and you may never wake up. Many horror characters have the ability to haunt our dreams, but none as menacingly as Freddy Krueger. One, two, Feddy’s coming for you…

Freddy Links

For those of you who are not already aware, there is a remake/re-visioning of “A Nightmare on Elm Street” set for theatrical release on April 30^th, 2010. It seems like all classics are being remade lately, doesn’t it? No new ideas I guess. Anyway, this remake looks pretty cool so I wanted to provide you with links so you can check it out yourselves. Sweet Dreams, Gentle Reader…

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) IMDB page

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)- New Movie Trailer @ Apple Movie Trailers



I consider myself a fairly avid horror fan. Ever since watching “Shaun of the Dead” in high school, I’ve slowly learned to enjoy the genre more and more. I love movies from every subgenre, from slashers to zombies (my personal favorite) to good old-fashioned ghost stories. I love ‘em all.

But one thing that’s always baffled me is franchise movies, particularly those of the “torture porn” variety. I was inspired to start doing some research after noticing the release of “Saw VI” a couple of weeks ago. I remember pretty vividly seeing “Saw II” and the remake of “The Hills Have Eyes” in high school, and realizing (with some relief) that, in fact, I did have a standard when it came to horror. I don’t stand for mindless stuff. If something horrific is going to happen to someone, as a viewer (and, I think, as a human being) I need to have some kind of justification for it. Otherwise, it just isn’t worth my time. I need a moral dilemma, a killer with a background, something other than random acts of violence that don’t send a message.

From my perspective, it seems like franchise horror movies are the epitome of what I consider “the wrong kind” of horror movie. The original films, the ones that start off the franchise, like “A Nightmare on Elm Street” or “Halloween,” even the original “Saw,” have some kind of message or some creative spark that stokes the interest of audiences enough to keep them coming. But whatever the original movies had going for them, it gets lost with every subsequent sequel or remake.

I wanted to get a professional opinion on this, so I turned to Eric Melin, who runs the movie review site Scene-Stealers.com. He told me the popularity of franchises comes from, in the case of Freddy, Jason and Michael Myers, a cult of personality and audiences who want to be scared, but don’t want to have to think about it too much.

“I worked in a video store for a while, and I used to see this every Halloween, when people would come in, because they’re so desperate for scary movies, and they want a new scary movie, so they go straight to the franchises,” Melin told me. “It’s just easier for people to say ‘This weekend we’re going to watch all the Children of the Corns.’ Why not watch something else?”

Why not watch something else, indeed? Why would people willingly choose a formulaic, predictable, meaningless horror movie when there are so many other great ones out there? Why watch “Freddy Vs. Jason” when you can see “The Orphanage?” According to Mark Kermode, a movie critic for BBC Radio 5, it’s precisely because of the formula that franchises are so popular.

In an essay he wrote for the Independent, called “Horror Will Eat Itself,” Kermode writes that familiar elements are exactly what many people like about horror movies. He uses Wes Craven’s “Scream” movies as an example, noting that the director’s simultaneous celebration and skewering of horror tropes were what made that particular franchise so popular.

Taking these opinions into consideration, what I’ve come to decide is this: familiarity is popular in horror, as in many other genres, but it’s popular for a unique reason, which is fear of the unknown. Consider the way you feel going into a horror movie you know nothing about: the uneasiness, the idea that you don’t know what to expect. All you know is that it’s going to be scary, and it’s going to be uncomfortable. Say the first “Nightmare on Elm Street” movie really scared you. Then, a while later, the second one comes out. You decide you want to go to a scary movie, and that’s the one you pick because now you know what to expect. Most of the uneasiness that you had with the original movie is now gone. You know how the killer operates, how and why he chooses his victims. Thanks to that formula, you can satisfy that bloodlust without having to be bothered by it.

Without the unpredictability, the only factor franchise horror movies have left to impress their audiences is what Melin refers to as “the creativity of the kill,” which is where torture porn comes in. With that, the movie loses its soul.

“I’ve had a lot of horror enthusiasts tell me that I can’t review horror movies the way I review another movie, in other words, I can’t apply the same criteria of wanting well-developed characters and story and stuff like that,” Melin said. “And to a certain extent, I kind of agree with that…But when there’s movies out there like Drag Me to Hell, and Slither and Frailty that do everything so well and also manage to be campy and fun at the same time, I think that I’m not really going to want to forgive a movie like the Hills Have Eyes remakes…I’m just not interested in what they’re doing, because they’re not doing anything interesting.”

Horror isn’t an easy genre to love. Fans probably get disappointments and cookie-cutter studio releases more often than legitimately good, creative movies. And it takes a certain kind of psychological toughness to go for the unfamiliar stuff over the movies you already know. But, in my mind, it’s worth it. “Jason Goes to Hell” might be fun, but “Shallow Grave” has meaning and thrills. That, to me, is more valuable than any number of Leatherfaces, Freddy Kruegers or Jigsaws.

Related Link:

Mark Kermode’s essay, “Horror Will Eat Itself”

The People Under the Stairs is a 1991 horror film directed by Wes Craven and starring Brandon Adams, Everett McGill, Wendy Robie, A. J. Langer, Ving Rhames and Sean Whalen.

Trivia:

• Wes Craven was inspired to write this film after seeing a real-life news story about parents who locked their children up inside their house, never allowing them outside.
• Wes Craven chose Wendy Robie and Everett McGill to play the parts of Mommy and Daddy after seeing them play husband and wife on the TV series, “Twin Peaks” (1990).
• Through out the entire movie you hear the Man and Woman call each other “Mommy” and “Daddy”. You never hear their real names. But when Alice attacks the woman, you hear her yell for the Man and she calls him Eldon.
• Although Alice was a 12 year old girl, actress A.J. Langer was almost 17 when she played the character in this movie.

A. J. Langer

Amazon Specials!