Better than original - A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) Discussion

[–] gareth242000 11 years ago

what a joke!

The original is a great movie with ideas and creativity. This absolute crap remake is incoherent and dumb in every way. Its one of the worst movies i have seen. As Kermode said its nastier but not in a good way, just louder and far more annoying. Its not scary, interesting or valid in anyway....another classic example of a crap director who shouldn't be allowed to direct making a quick buck....and how he will succeed i have no doubt

CRAP CRAP CRAP

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] YankeeDood 11 years ago

Definitely a good remake and I am glad they made Freddy into a sadistic pedophile because that is in the original Wes Craven script.
Anyone who gets turned off by a pedophile Freddy is not a true horror fan because horror is horror. Plus, "fans of the old Freddy" must have missed Freddy vs Jason where Robert Englund is licking pictures of young children before adding them to his demented photo album, indicating a sexual lust for them.
I do prefer the original, the characters are more interesting, but this one has legitimate horror in it. Loved the ending too.

7/10

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] gluserty 11 years ago

Look, I think this remake is alright (yet unnecessary), but in no way is it better than the original. Man, the original film was so outside the box for it's time (the film "Dreamscape", released the same year, shares some elements of the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street"); also it contained main characters with more verve, an atmosphere with more sense of dread, and had a quality of mystery that the remake couldn't pull off (to the remake's credit, it didn't try too hard to bother with that).
Anyway, the way I look at it is this: if the original film is a masterpiece, there is NO WAY a remake can be an improvement. I mean, we're not talking about remaking "The Hitcher" or "The Stepfather" here (I like the originals, but they are more "cult classics").

reply

[–] YankeeDood 11 years ago

Yup, it's one the few remakes I enjoyed in the 2010's. New and old Freddy are equally awesome, imo.

"You can't kill the boogeyman."

- Tommy Doyle

reply

[–] Hitman84 11 years ago

New Freddy *beep* sucks, he's supposed to look more like a "natural burn victim" in this? if the old Freddy looked like a fake burn victim, he looked a HELL of a lot better than the natural burn victim...I hate the remake with a passion, but most of all the "new Freddy" I thought he was pretty horrible...

Plum near cut his head in two mmmmm hmmmmm

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kndykss 10 years ago

You're kidding right?

reply

[–] LaraCroftLegacy 10 years ago

Have to disagree the original nightmare on elm street is better but do give credit to Jackie Earl Harley as Freddy Krueger

D.H.F.F
Lara Croft Himiko! The First Sun Queen! This is Yamatai

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Frantastic_Miss_Fox 10 years ago

I wouldn't say better, because the original is a classic and well deserved, but I certainly enjoyed it as much as the original but for different reasons. I don't understand why it gets so much hate, I thought they did a good job with it. Especially when you compare it with other recent remakes of classic horror movies.

'You people. If there isn't a movie about it, it's not worth knowing, is it?'

reply