Elm Street remake - the new Freddy?

[MinionZombie]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090406/ten-haley-set-for-nightmare-remake-ea4616c.html

Hmmm...:rockbrow:

ANOES is cool and all, but I'm not that fussed about the franchise in general - #1 and #3 are really the only ones worth bothering with.

Now, Friday 13th on the other hand, that's a slasher franchise and a half. :cool:

[bassman]

Good casting decision, I say. I think Haley is good for it. Never was a big fan of the series, though.

[MikePizzoff]

Huge fan of the series. As much as I don't want to see it remade, he's probably a good choice to play Kreuger; that dude played a really creepy role in Little Children and, of course, he ruled as Kelly in the Bad News Bears movies.

[MoonSylver]

Now THAT is the best casting news I've heard in a LOOOOONNNNG time. He was TOTALLY 100& badass as Rorschach in "Watchman". I was blown away by his performance & immediately wondering what he would be in next & hoping he would be able to ride the wave, so to speak, on to other projects.

Great, great, news. Gives me so much more hope than that goddamn Billy Bob Thorton rumor did (*ugh*)...

[AcesandEights]

he ruled as Kelly in the Bad News Bears movies.

Holy shit...I didn't know that was Kelly!!! So a child star successfully summoned the pathos to portray Rorschach? Now it all makes sense.

[krakenslayer]

Meh. Don't care, really. Doubt I'll ever see it, I have no desire to watch anymore middle of the road horror remakes. Continuity = good, therefore remakes = bad.

[clanglee]

Holy shit...I didn't know that was Kelly!!! So a child star successfully summoned the pathos to portray Rorschach? Now it all makes sense.

:lol: you didn't know that? My Ass was biting a hole in my seat when I heard the news that Haley was picked as Rorschach!! I was sooo worried. . then I saw Little Children and became less worried. It's weird, this guy just plain disappeared after the BNB. . and then all of a sudden we have this really really capable actor showing up out of nowhere. It's good stuff.

As far as FK is concerned. . Haley is a good pick for that role methinks.

[AcesandEights]

:lol: you didn't know that?

No, I just thought he was some dude with a name that sounded like someone who would try and assassinate a president or go on some mass shooting-spree.

I mean, come on...if Jackie Earl Haley doesn't sound like some dude destined to clime to the top of a clock tower and start plinking people, then I'm totally mystified. Tell me I'm wrong there, if you can :p

[clanglee]

No, I just thought he was some dude with a name that sounded like someone who would try and assassinate a president or go on some mass shooting-spree.

I mean, come on...if Jackie Earl Haley doesn't sound like some dude destined to clime to the top of a clock tower and start plinking people, then I'm totally mystified. Tell me I'm wrong there, if you can :p

Very good point and no argument from me, either that or a serial killer.

[darth los]

:lol: you didn't know that? My Ass was biting a hole in my seat when I heard the news that Haley was picked as Rorschach!! I was sooo worried. . then I saw Little Children and became less worried. It's weird, this guy just plain disappeared after the BNB. . and then all of a sudden we have this really really capable actor showing up out of nowhere. It's good stuff.

As far as FK is concerned. . Haley is a good pick for that role methinks.


So, I guess the question on everyone's mind is: What part is Tatum O'neal going to play?

The world watches and waits with baited breath....





:cool:

[SymphonicX]

Mm, is that shit on my finger? Betta lick it to check....

Yep...that was shit on my finger.

Oh well, that was more fun than the idea of this movie.....wait a sec....is that shit on my finger?

[slickwilly13]

First photo of the new Freddy. I also read another one is on the way.


http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/16831

[shootemindehead]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090406/ten-haley-set-for-nightmare-remake-ea4616c.html

Hmmm...:rockbrow:

ANOES is cool and all, but I'm not that fussed about the franchise in general - #1 and #3 are really the only ones worth bothering with.

Now, Friday 13th on the other hand, that's a slasher franchise and a half. :cool:

Oh for gods sake......more bleedin remakes?

[bassman]

Well that's pretty much a whole lotta nothing.:confused:

[AcesandEights]

I'll not see this unless the DJ Jazzy Jeff and the Fresh Prince opus, "Nightmare on My Street" is a part of the score.

[Doc]

Looks nice to me. Like, something out of Nightmare 2. We can't see his face though. Tease.

[slickwilly13]

Here's an official sheet.

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/16834

[Doc]

I think its an awesome teaser poster, I'd like to see a better official poster, with more story in it though.

[capncnut]

I think it is best summed up in one of the comments.


Pretty good teaser poster. Too bad the film is gonna suck.

[shootemindehead]

Have to say, I am utterly fed up with the re-hash mentality of this decade. I've been sitting down to the remakes of the horror flicks of my youth, 'The Amityville Horror', 'The Hills Have Eyes', 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' and 'Friday the 13th'.

All of them have been rubbish, except for 'The Hills Have Eyes'. Which I thought was much better than the original, but in fairness that wasn't very good to begin with.

I have no doubt that this 'Nightmare on Elm Street' will be the pale cousin of the original 1985 classic.

But, 'Friday the 13th' in particular was bloody awful. There's very little to recommend it, except for Jason who was actually quite well done for the most part. However, the film is repleat with the most terrible cliches, especially the "telliporting killer" shock. What I mean by that is in some scenes, Jason (a big man by any standard) has literally snuck up on some dopey character in a matter of a couple of frames without making a sound! It's ridiculous.

Cheap effort at shocks, but nothing more.

The original 'Friday the 13th' was that great, but at least it entertaining for the time and had a decent enough "twist" at the end with the revelation of the mother.

They'll probably remake 'Jaws' next. :rolleyes:

[MinionZombie]

I think it is best summed up in one of the comments.
:lol:

Aye - and it's sodding Platinum Dunes - all they ever do is remakes. Hell, I remember seeing on their blog two photos - one from Friday 13th remake, and one from ANOES remake - they both had two people standing by a police car in a spooky setting. The images were almost identical ... says it all really. :p

Seriously - the point in re-doing something is because you haven't done it correctly in the first place. But the likes of Friday and Nightmare have been done correctly in the first place. I keep saying it like I'm banging my head against a wall, but remake a shit film and you'll make something better - Drive-In Massacre is a perfect example - it's utter crap, but with the proliferation of Grindhouse-like cinema on our screens again, it would be the ideal time to do it.

It's like The Toolbox Murders - the remake is, compared to the original, pretty decent - although it is a bit tame in general, but far more consistent in purpose and style. The original is good for the first 40 minutes, then it becomes an absolutely atrocious piece of nonsensical garbage.

Even the odd remake that has been good/entertaining (e.g. TCM, or Halloween) haven't lived up to or beaten the original - so really, what's the point?

Hills Have Eyes is another thing though, personally I'm not all that fussed about the original, especially the final act - whereas I rather enjoyed the Aja remake, and the final act was definitely better than that of the original movie, in my view - but that's a rare case.

...

Also, Mark Kermode made an interesting comment about these remakes - specifically about the one for Friday 13th - these horror classics came out at a certain point in time, and that is part of the reason why they're so revered and indeed so good - but you take these titles out of context when you remake them, and they then become pretty much meaningless and indeed generally toothless.

[shootemindehead]

Yep. Kermode's obervations (and yours MZ ! ) are pretty much in line with my own. Although, I think it still possible to make a shit remake from a shit film too...'Godzilla', anyone.

On remaking movies of a certain vintage, I've often wondered how I'd view a remake of 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. When I was a lad, this film had such an impact on my life. It's hard to explain it nowadays (not to mention bloody embarrasing :D ), but I became obsessed with tracking down an uncut copy of it. It had become so notorious that it manifested into some sort of gory holy grail for me. A case against banning films, if ever there was one.

I hunted this film like Interpol would chase a wanted man. Had friends all over Europe asking people in video stores about a film that nobody had a clue about. Gemma, my friend in Barcelona, thought I was making it up and was convinced I was sending her on a wild goose chase.

I used to frequent a video shop where I lived (even though we didn't actually own a video :clown: ) .This was the early 80's and video had just saturated the market a couple of years before. It was before the "Video Nasties" bill fecked everything up. But the shop owner used to let me wander around and look at the boxes (with all their glorious artwork! ) and he'd let me pick some flicks to watch too on the shop's TV during quiet periods. Of course, I picked the most ferocious stuff I could find, 'Monster' (Humanoids from the Deep to you Yanks), 'Driller Killer', 'The Exorcist', 'Dawn of the Dead', 'Cannibal Ferox / Holocaust' and 'The Prowler' etc. But for some reason, I never asked to see 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. To this day I've no idea why, It was certainly "on my to do list" as it were.

Anyway, the "Video Nasties" bill got put through in the UK and these flicks began to disappear from the shelves here in Ireland too. So, I never got to see 'Zombie Flesh Eaters' in the 80's. But over the years, I then built up the film into the 'Citizen Kane' of zombie/gore movies and the likes of "Fangoria" and "The Dark Side" magazines only made matters worse.

Then one day in the early 90's, I saw an advert in the back of a mag offering uncut copies (bad ones) of these films for a small price and the cost of P+P. I decided to risk getting 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. It was wierd. I felt like I was buying sado porn or something. Anyway, the film arrived and I loved it, though I though it was less gory than I'd been led to believe :eek:. But it's remained a favorite of mine.

With the advent of DVD, I now have a pristine copy of my Holy Grail, but it now seems strangely lacklustre as a polished DVD production. Viewing a "nasty" on DVD kind of diminishes the result in a bizarre way.

It comes down to the fact that 'Zombie Flesh Eaters' appeared at a certain time and was part of a certain zeitgiest (I hate that term) and all of those elements went into the enjoyment of the film. It's also coupled with the fact that as a younger person, I wasn't as jaded with movies as I am now. But, even with that taken into account, I think it's the low budget nature and the general weirdness that drove a lot of those late 70's/early 80's horror movies. Especially the European ones. Making big budget glossy remakes of these flicks, just miss the point. It's one of the reasons I am "meh" about Snyder's 'Dawn of the Dead'.

And probably, if anyone decided to remake 'Zombie Flesh Eaters', I'd be "meh" about that too, although I do believe it's possible to remake good films into good films, 'Night of the Living Dead (1990)' is a fine example of that. In fact, I prefer watching that to the original one now, even though I think we were short changed on the gore.



Hmmmm.....sorry for the essay folks. :bored:

[bassman]

You guys sure do get your knickers in a twist over some damn remakes. True, most are bad....but at least give it some sort of a small chance. There's no way you could give it a fair viewing if you're already damning it without one second of footage.

And what makes it worse is that you guys act like it somehow effects the original. When it doesn't. The original will always be there.:confused:

I never was a huge fan of the original anyway, but I'll definitely be seeing this one if for nothing else than to check out Haley's post-Watchmen performance. Dude fucking rocked as Walter Kovacs!:D

[shootemindehead]

You guys sure do get your knickers in a twist over some damn remakes. True, most are bad....but at least give it some sort of a small chance. There's no way you could give it a fair viewing if you're already damning it without one second of footage.

And what makes it worse is that you guys act like it somehow effects the original. When it doesn't. The original will always be there.:confused:



True, people get precious about things. However, the dross that usually comprises a remake has set a dodgy precedent. So much so, that the obvious reaction is not "I'll wait and see", but "This will probably be shte."

Also, I think remakes, unofficial sequels and ripoffs do affect the original material somewhat. How many times has someone mentioned "Brainnnsssss..." to you when you bring up 'Night of the Living Dead'?

In a conversation I had the other week, 'Day of the Dead' was mentioned and someone said he hated the film, but thought Ving Rhames was good in it and the blonde girl was hot...

I nearly puked.

[major jay]

I used to frequent a video shop where I lived (even though we didn't actually own a video :clown: ) .This was the early 80's and video had just saturated the market a couple of years before. It was before the "Video Nasties" bill fecked everything up. But the shop owner used to let me wander around and look at the boxes (with all their glorious artwork! ) and he'd let me pick some flicks to watch too on the shop's TV during quiet periods. Of course, I picked the most ferocious stuff I could find, 'Monster' (Humanoids from the Deep to you Yanks), 'Driller Killer', 'The Exorcist', 'Dawn of the Dead', 'Cannibal Ferox / Holocaust' and 'The Prowler' etc. But for some reason, I never asked to see 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. To this day I've no idea why, It was certainly "on my to do list" as it were.

That's very cool, thanks for sharing that.

[kortick]

I will be glad when this remake fad passes.

wheter they are good or bad isnt really the point

id like to see something original

i heard that a re make of Phantasm is
being talked about.
Coscarelli isnt opposed to it but he thinks
he may do one more film himself so the funny part
is his will be direct to DVD and the remake will be
big budget high release.

its true what someone mentioned, it isnt the films
alone but the times they were released.
I remember when Friday came out and there were
riots at drive ins and it was pulled in some places.

Also the original Freddy was intense back in 1983
I saw it in a midnight show and the crowd was
totally into it. Part II made Freddy a joke, but the
first one was a great film at the time.

[Doc]

Part II made Freddy a joke, but the
first one was a great film at the time.

What makes you say that? He was just as, dark as ever hell maybe, even eviler.:confused: Then again, I guess I do know what your saying. Freddy is dark and scary in it because of who he is, but not because of what he does.

Busting out into the night instead of a dream and scurrying around, heating up a pool, attacking a toaster, breaking all the objects in Lisa's house.:|

[capncnut]

i heard that a re make of Phantasm is
being talked about.
Coscarelli isnt opposed to it but he thinks
he may do one more film himself so the funny part
is his will be direct to DVD and the remake will be
big budget high release.
:stunned:


Also the original Freddy was intense back in 1983
I saw it in a midnight show and the crowd was
totally into it. Part II made Freddy a joke, but the
first one was a great film at the time.
Yeah but Kim Myers had a banging pair, even if she didn't get them out.

[Doc]

Yeah but Kim Myers had a banging pair, even if she didn't get them out.

Fu*k, by that movie's logic, everyone should dance to 'All Night Long' and hope a hot babe walks in.:cool::p

[bassman]

If anyone is just dying to see the trailer for this NOES remake....I've just seen that it will be attached to Zombieland next week. As if anyone here needed more of a reason to see a movie called Zombieland....

[AcesandEights]

If anyone is just dying to see the trailer for this NOES remake....I've just seen that it will be attached to Zombieland next week. As if anyone here needed more of a reason to see a movie called Zombieland....

Good to know, though! You'd best believe I'll be there, NOES trailer or not.

[bassman]

Here's the trailer.....

v9QSfHWu8Nk&hl=en&fs=1&

I've never been a huge fan of the original, but it's enjoyable. That said....I think this looks like it could be pretty cool.:stunned:

and I still love the casting of Haley...

[MinionZombie]

I wanted to see more of Freddy in the trailer, to be honest ... but I do like the inclusion of the origin. We only hear about it in the original movie, so seeing it should be cool - hopefully it's not just something tacked on before the title (but I bet it is though). It needs a longer analysis I think.

Not a huge fan of the original films by any means, but 1 and 3 were awesome. 2 was alright ... but 4 through 6 were terrible (especially 6) and 7 was okay at the end, but it took so long to get anywhere I couldn't be arsed.

I'm still annoyed by all these goddamn remakes though, there's no need, and they take advantage of horror fans who'll simply keep seeing these horror movies - we're like zombies in that way.

I mean seriously, how many surpass the original, and how many are actually worthwhile in the end?

[Danny]

looks like a NOE flick to me, and before it got bullshit too, should be pretty good.

[DjfunkmasterG]

THis looks kick ass, but something tells me it will have that TCM 2003 and other Michael Bay flare all over it.

[slickwilly13]

If you pause it at 1:55 can see his face now, be'otches.

[darth los]

It does actually look pretty good.


Just because it's a remake I'm not going to shit all over it....yet.


I wanna judge it on it's own merits and forget there ever was an original.


Comparing remakes to the original more often than not taints the the popular opinion of the remake and even if it does suck, it doesn't get a fair analysis because of that.






:cool:

[SymphonicX]

I mean seriously, how many surpass the original, and how many are actually worthwhile in the end?

I heard there was this great remake of Dawn of the Dead, oscar winning dark noir character study with black comedy and plenty of scares...

I heard that....then the whispering stopped and I woke up with a wet gym sock on my stomach.

[MinionZombie]

I heard there was this great remake of Dawn of the Dead, oscar winning dark noir character study with black comedy and plenty of scares...

I heard that....then the whispering stopped and I woke up with a wet gym sock on my stomach.

Dirty bugger ... make sure you rinse that sock out. :p


THis looks kick ass, but something tells me it will have that TCM 2003 and other Michael Bay flare all over it.

I was thinking the exact same thing - speaking of which, on the Platinum Dunes blog a while ago there was a picture of a cop car in a dark, creepy setting with two dudes standing by it (the writers, or something, producers maybe, I duno) ... and then right at the bottom of the blog in one of the later posts for Friday 13th 2009, there was a picture of a cop car in a dark, creepy setting with two dudes standing by it (the writers, or something, producers maybe, I duno) ... :lol:

[capncnut]

Looks utter gash to me.

[clanglee]

I was kinda excited to hear that haley was gonna be krueger, but after seeing that. . . well. . he looks like a frog. I dunno. We shall see wont we.

[kortick]

They missed the chance to cast the
ULTIMATE Freddy.

See what happens when u wait.

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg69/kortick/fred.jpg

[MikePizzoff]

Looks utter gash to me.

Phwew. I was beginning to think I was the only one who thought this looked like garbage.

It looks like there's going to be far too much Krueger and he also looks CGI'd/like shit. I know he looks more like a burn victim, but in the original he was not only a burn victim but also returning from hell, which gave him an exaggerated monster-like look.

Also, he was most certainly a child murderer in the original series. Here, however, it seems they're going to portray him as someone whom was wrongfully accused/murdered... so he's coming back for revenge by actually murdering teenagers? I don't think that's very logical, in the revenge sense.

Who knows, though, I'll try giving the trailer another few views when I'm in better moods.

[slickwilly13]

Has anyone read a rumor about this movie having a PG-13 rating?

[clanglee]

Has anyone read a rumor about this movie having a PG-13 rating?

I have now. . . :p

[Mike70]

Has anyone read a rumor about this movie having a PG-13 rating?

ugh. i try to pretend that's one of those crazy interwebz things. hopefully it is.

[deadpunk]

I was never a fan of this franchise. I thought the first movie was a bit more clever than the slasher films being mass produced at the time, but it degraded quickly to meet the standard of all slasher series.

Personally, I don't mind a remake here and there. Some movies were made before their time and tend to benefit from being redone. This particular peice of crap isn't an example of that, but hey....:evil:

[bassman]

First clear look at Frederick's face. It's a toy, but you get the idea. Sideshow makes amazingly accurate sculpts....

http://www.fearnet.com/news/photos/b17455_heeeeeres_freddy.html

http://images.fearnet.com/fearnetImages/imZSLteiLmPXQHAzQ7mogd3Q==.jpg

[darth los]

ugh. i try to pretend that's one of those crazy interwebz things. hopefully it is.

It's probably true dude. With the gargantuan finacial investment movie studios make in these films they are looking to maximize their profit any way they can. The Pg-13 rating lets the movie be accessable to a wider audience therefore, more money.

:cool:

[slickwilly13]

He doesn't really look menancing. Let's hope Freddy is a nasty basturd in this remake or its doomed to fail.

[darth los]

He doesn't really look menancing. Let's hope Freddy is a nasty basturd in this remake or its doomed to fail.


Well, imo, what made freddy stand out from all the other psychos of his time is that he had personality. He wasn't just this silent guy in a mask (Jason, Myers) going around and hacking people up. Not for nothing but he could be really funny at times and that is a dimension the others just don't have.

Here's to hoping they don't screw it up too badly.

:cool:

[deadpunk]

Holy crap...my nephew called, he wants his Halloween costume back. :sneaky:

[MoonSylver]

First clear look at Frederick's face. It's a toy, but you get the idea. Sideshow makes amazingly accurate sculpts....

http://www.fearnet.com/news/photos/b17455_heeeeeres_freddy.html

http://images.fearnet.com/fearnetImages/imZSLteiLmPXQHAzQ7mogd3Q==.jpg

Bleh.:| I heard they were going to go with a more realistic (:rolleyes:) look, as in what a burn victim would actually look like. I want Kruger to look like Kruger please.

[bassman]

Bleh.:| I heard they were going to go with a more realistic (:rolleyes:) look, as in what a burn victim would actually look like. I want Kruger to look like Kruger please.

I'm not a huge fan of the series, but he looks like Kruger to me. Striped shirt, fucked up face, hat, and glove. I would say it looks like him...

[MoonSylver]

I'm not a huge fan of the series, but he looks like Kruger to me. Striped shirt, fucked up face, hat, and glove. I would say it looks like him...

Yeah & no...it's the eyes & the nose & the mouth.

http://images.fearnet.com/fearnetImages/imZSLteiLmPXQHAzQ7mogd3Q==.jpghttp://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/freddy.png

Realize it's not a huge difference, & they got all the other aspects right, but I just don't like it:|

[bassman]

Yeah, but didn't Englund's Kruger also change from movie to movie?

I'll put it this way....at least the essentials are there. It could be worse. They could've done something as drastic as changing shambling zombies to runners in a remake of Dawn of the Dead.:sneaky:

[MoonSylver]

Yeah, but didn't Englund's Kruger also change from movie to movie?

A bit. They played with the make up a little but it stayed essentially the same.


I'll put it this way....at least the essentials are there. It could be worse. They could've done something as drastic as changing shambling zombies to runners in a remake of Dawn of the Dead.:sneaky:

True. It's just a bit jarring. Maybe it'll look better on screen or grow on me or something. Just the initial impression that struck me was "bleh".:|

[bassman]

True. It's just a bit jarring. Maybe it'll look better on screen or grow on me or something. Just the initial impression that struck me was "bleh".:|

I can understand that. Maybe the performance will make up for it. Haley is a great actor, so i bet he's got something up his sleeve to bring to the table.

[MoonSylver]

I can understand that. Maybe the performance will make up for it. Haley is a great actor, so i bet he's got something up his sleeve to bring to the table.

Yep, THAT I am looking forward to.:)

[deadpunk]

http://images.fearnet.com/fearnetImages/imZSLteiLmPXQHAzQ7mogd3Q==.jpg

http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc284/thebeergoblin/facepalm_implied.jpg

:D

[MikePizzoff]

I'm a fan of Haley as an actor... however, I'm getting the feeling his Krueger voice is going to be annoying.

[rongravy]

I'm a fan of Haley as an actor... however, I'm getting the feeling his Krueger voice is going to be annoying.
I keep picturing him in Semi Pro. Or Losing It.
I dunno, I thought the original Nightmares turned crappy after the first. He'll be what makes it hit or miss, I'll tell you that.

[MoonSylver]

I keep picturing him in Semi Pro. Or Losing It.

Oh yeaaahhh....wow...didn't realize that was HIM...been a long time since I saw that one...

http://jackieearlehaley.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/by-patricia-b-in-who-n628900159_6378362_55633981-328x246-custom.jpg

[rongravy]

Oh yeaaahhh....wow...didn't realize that was HIM...been a long time since I saw that one...



Ha, he was a perv in that one too...

[slickwilly13]

More behind the scenes footage.


pzSzIhATgyY&feature=player_embedded

[MinionZombie]

I look forward to seeing what Haley does with the character of Freddy, and I dug the shot with the hat on the box which pans back and his eyes are just glimpsing over it.

Otherwise, goddamn, how many shots have they directly copied from the original movie? Sheesh. This is the problem with all these feckin' remakes, and this makes me dig Halloween 2007 even more, and dare I say it - H2 even more - because at least RZ did what he wanted to do, even though H2007 does feature similar shots or segments - but well ... I duno, it just plays better when in the context of everything else.

In that EPK it just feels a bit tacked on, like they're chuffed to be 'legitimately' able to copy and paste those shots.

Am I making sense? Probably not. :D

[slickwilly13]

A good look at Freddy. He turned out much better than I thought.


http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/19678

[MinionZombie]

Good that they're going for the more realistic burn victim look, particularly around the eyes and nose ... it makes it scarier. Whether the film will be any good is a whole other ball park ... I do wish Platinum Dunes would stop remaking good franchises. I mean, they could really do something good (and better) with a shitty film from way back (e.g. Drive-In Massacre).

[darth los]

I do wish Platinum Dunes would stop remaking good franchises.


Imo, the first three films are good. The rest? Well, i'll just be kind and say, meh.

:cool:

[MikePizzoff]

Imo, the first three films are good. The rest? Well, i'll just be kind and say, meh.

:cool:

:barf: You liked part 2?!?!

[SymphonicX]

Part 2 was quite dark when you look back on it and is the only sequel to attempt to clone the atmosphere and tension that permeated the first movie...so in a sense that's cool and overall the movie is kinda creepy and evil feeling...although overall it wasn't such an enjoyable movie, some of the moments in it were pretty awesome (like the party scene and the dogs with faces). After the 2nd they became comedies with cheesy one liners and silly death scenes - maybe number 2 helped bring that along with the whole "you've got the body, I've got the brains" line - cos really if you look back at number one I think Freddy's only line was something like "i'm gonna split you in two"

[MikePizzoff]

I'd say the only good segment of part 2 is the opening sequence. Other than that, from what I can recall it just felt like a teen angst/romance movie script some studio exec read and thought "This would be great if we incorporated Freddy!"

[JDFP]

I can't remember the name of the chic from the second one, but she was quite enjoyable.

And, no, I'm not referring to her 'acting' (ahem)...

:elol:

j.p.

[darth los]

I'd say the only good segment of part 2 is the opening sequence. Other than that, from what I can recall it just felt like a teen angst/romance movie script some studio exec read and thought "This would be great if we incorporated Freddy!"


Every series has a black sheep. Not in the sense that they are bad films but it's just not like the others for whatever reason.

Freddy was actually making Jesse turn and murder in the real world, not dreamland, which is something none of the other films attempted to do.

Whether it worked or not (i liked it) atleast they went for something different.

:cool:

[LouCipherr]

Otherwise, goddamn, how many shots have they directly copied from the original movie? Sheesh. This is the problem with all these feckin' remakes, and this makes me dig Halloween 2007 even more, and dare I say it - H2 even more - because at least RZ did what he wanted to do, even though H2007 does feature similar shots or segments - but well ... I duno, it just plays better when in the context of everything else.

This is exactly what I hope they do not do. I'm all for slight changes or updates to a flick if you're doing a remake, but for the love of all that is holy, completely fucking the story, characters and "feel" of the film like RZ did to Halloween is not the way I, personally, want things to go down. Don't remove the "core" of the film and take too many liberties. That's destroying what people cherished about the original in the first place.

I'm still torn about this. On one hand, I see this as another classic that shouldn't be messed with, but I am very interested to see how they go about it. Since they're keeping a lot of the original scenes intact, I might just like their approach - but that remains to be seen.

I remain cautious, but curious.

[darth los]

Imo, if i had to pick between the original and the remakes I'd take the remake everytime. I just like his sadistic storytelling he employs in his films.

:cool:

[bassman]

Imo, if i had to pick between the original and the remakes I'd take the remake everytime. I just like his sadistic storytelling he employs in his films.


Are you refering to Zombie's remakes? If so then yes, I totally agree. He took Carpenter's dull film and injected some life in it. It may be redneck trailer trash life.....but look at murderers in reality. Most of them come from a background similar to that.

As for the new Elm Street - Hailey is an incredible actor, the director is a newbie from music videos, and the original isn't all that hot to me. So this one I'm looking forward to.

[darth los]

Are you refering to Zombie's remakes?

Yes, I should have been clearer on that point considering what the o.p. was. :o

Alot of the old slasher films when watched today come off as very cliche'd and cheesy. Alot can be said about RZ's remakes but that's not one of them.

I think that he was able to make it his own and at the same time not fuck up the essence of the character. As a matter of fact, imo, Michael Myers comes off as way more sadistic and psychopathic especially in RZ's sequel.

Now what they did with the New Jason, well...

Textbook examples i guess of something done right and something done wrong, imo.

:cool:

[bassman]

I felt like they missed the characters in TCSM, as well. It just didn't have the same psycho family feel that the original had. It wasn't a terrible remake, but it had potential to really expand on the original. I think Beil's fine ass is the only reason I can't hate it, though.:sneaky:

[darth los]

I felt like they missed the characters in TCSM, as well. It just didn't have the same psycho family feel that the original had. It wasn't a terrible remake, but it had potential to really expand on the original. I think Beil's fine ass is the only reason I can't hate it, though.:sneaky:

I never need much of an excuse to post a pic of her fine ass.


http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n300/cntrygirl568/jessica_biel.jpg

:cool:

[MinionZombie]

*gawps at picture for about five minutes*

I think the TCM remake, while not a patch on the original (naturally), was worthwhile enough to stick around. I really dig R. Lee Ermey's character (who steals the whole show that is TCM: The Beginning), who is just such an utter psycho, but who has the best lines.

Jessica Biel ... in tight jeans, tight white vest and a cowboy hat ... ... good lord. :);):)

Where was I? Oh yeah, Ermey was bad ass in those two flicks.

It's a shame they treated the Friday 13th remake as an excuse to do TCM2003 all over again. Same director, DP, etc ... it looked exactly the same, had the same rural horror vibe of TCM03 (totally misplaced in a Friday flick), indeed re-watching it recently there were several shots which I simply couldn't decipher because of all the broken-up scattered light and shadows (often coming through a tree, it seems) ... some shots are like a fucking puzzle to figure out what you're looking at, and they're so brief you've got no chance unless you pause it and stare at it like it's a magic eye picture of a fucking sail boat!

I duno about this ANOES remake ... Haley is a big thumbs up, but it looks ridiculously swish visually, and too much like the original. What's the point in seeing the exact same sequences but shot 30 years later with different people? I'll see it, no doubt about that, but it could go either way ... indeed it could easily be more bad than good.

I say again - remake a shit movie instead!

[slickwilly13]

I never need much of an excuse to post a pic of her fine ass.


http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n300/cntrygirl568/jessica_biel.jpg

:cool:

Jessica Biel is so fucking hot. Why she doesn't take it all off is beyond me. Lucky ass Timberlake.

[MinionZombie]

Jessica Biel is so fucking hot. Why she doesn't take it all off is beyond me. Lucky ass Timberlake.
She has had her norks out before. Only twice so far, mind ... I think it was part of her "image change" period (which included TCM2003). She also got her norks out in some recent movie called Powder Blue where she played a stripper. ;)

[bassman]

She also got her norks out in some recent movie called Powder Blue where she played a stripper. ;)

Yeah, also did a nice little dance and played with some hot wax, if I remember correctly.:elol:

[MinionZombie]

Yeah, also did a nice little dance and played with some hot wax, if I remember correctly.:elol:
That's the one ... ain't seen the movie (apparently it's shit), but I've seen that clip. :lol:

[LouCipherr]

What's the point in seeing the exact same sequences but shot 30 years later with different people?

Well, this isn't like the Psycho shot-for-shot remake. I think NOES, even if they keep the majority of the original scenes, could work with an 'updated' look while keeping the original story intact.

At least people aren't going to suffer from "remake shock" - meaning, they go and see a remake of their favorite film and find out someone has fucked up the entire story, characters and pacing of a classic. *cough*RZ*cough*

It still shocks me how many think RZ did a good job with Halloween and H2. :barf: I think you guys need a check-up from the neck up. :lol:


BTW, MZ: It's a SCHOONER! :lol:

[slickwilly13]

She has had her norks out before. Only twice so far, mind ... I think it was part of her "image change" period (which included TCM2003). She also got her norks out in some recent movie called Powder Blue where she played a stripper. ;)

Post pics or I won't believe you. :p

[MinionZombie]

haha, glad you got the reference, Lou. :D

I'm not talking shot-for-shot, I'm talking sequence-for-sequence. Where's the surprise? "Oh this is the Johnny Depp bit" or "oh this is that chick who gets fucked up on the ceiling after fucking that dude" or whatever.

What I dug about the RZ versions of H1 and H2 (although H2 was a follow-up to his flick, and not a remake of the original H2) was that he took the basic beats and then did what he wanted to do with them. If you're gonna remake, you might as well do something different - whether it works or not is debatable (but I think it worked in H1 and H2 - not a patch on the original, no way, naturally - but it worked well for what it was ... and that's not an invitation to say "a piece of shit" :p).

[JDFP]

Well, this isn't like the Psycho shot-for-shot remake. I think NOES, even if they keep the majority of the original scenes, could work with an 'updated' look while keeping the original story intact.

At least people aren't going to suffer from "remake shock" - meaning, they go and see a remake of their favorite film and find out someone has fucked up the entire story, characters and pacing of a classic. *cough*RZ*cough*

It still shocks me how many think RZ did a good job with Halloween and H2. :barf: I think you guys need a check-up from the neck up. :lol:


BTW, MZ: It's a SCHOONER! :lol:

Why bother making a film if it's going to be identical to the film (or almost identical) to the film that was already made? That seems a bit redundant and silly to me. Count me in as one of those people who shock you for considering R.Z.'s H1 're-telling' to be extremely good, I absolutely enjoyed it. He kept the same plot (and thus the "remake" moniker) and yet had the courage to turn it into a different story with exploring the perspective of Myers as a psychopath instead of a "bogeyman". I personally really enjoyed it. H2 as a continuation to his re-telling was also interesting, though I agree no where near as compelling as his H1.

I generally despise re-makes because it's pointless and just, well, there's no damn need for it. I think the only thing worse than making re-makes of classic films is when Hollywood attempts to re-make a foreign film (because, gasp, Americans are too damn inconvenienced to have to read subtitles!), that just ticks me off.

If you're going to re-do a film anyway, I think you could learn something from R.Z. in keeping the same plot/ideology of the original but turning it into something completely unique while keeping with the same concept of the original, otherwise why bother to just see the same damn thing again when you've already seen the original?

j.p.

[LouCipherr]

haha, glad you got the reference, Lou. :D

Of course! I'm a huge Kevin Smith nutswinger, can't help it. :lol:


I'm not talking shot-for-shot, I'm talking sequence-for-sequence. Where's the surprise? "Oh this is the Johnny Depp bit" or "oh this is that chick who gets fucked up on the ceiling after fucking that dude" or whatever.

The surprise is how they update it and bring it up to "now" so-to-speak.


What I dug about the RZ versions of H1 and H2 (although H2 was a follow-up to his flick, and not a remake of the original H2)

Thank GOD - he couldn't get the first one right!!


If you're gonna remake, you might as well do something different -

I don't mind that, but I *DO* mind it when the original story is raped repeatedly and there is no remnants of the original film minus a few character's names and his mask, which I feel was the case with Halloween.


but it worked well for what it was ... and that's not an invitation to say "a piece of shit" :p).

Yes it most certainly is. :lol: :D

I dunno man, I guess I'm in the "I don't get it" crowd. It really sucks too, because most people I know other than a select few thing RZ's Halloween was a fantastic film. I just don't see what everyone else sees in it I guess. Or I have a major case of Carpenterism that I can't seem to shake.

As far as NOES - I like the idea of them doing quite a few sequences from the original. Like I said, as long as it's brought up to date like the rest of the film. I have no doubt there will be some surprises in this film.

Against my better judgement, I'll open this can of worms....

Now, here's what I really find interesting - and I'll put this thought out to all of you who are big RZ Halloween & GAR fans - why is it that Rob can change almost every bit of Halloween aside from character names and his mask and it's perfectly fine, however... Dawn04 was EXACTLY the same experience and yet most everyone rags on that film. Why? They brought it up to date, they changed the story around a bit but kept the "core" of the idea intact - just like what's being called for on NOES and exactly what RZ did with Halloween, but yet it's a bad thing for Dawn04??

Someone care to explain?

DO NOT use "running zombies" as the excuse - sorry, but they changed Michael Meyers and every other character in Hallowen up so much from the original, runners vs. shamblers is basically the same kind of change done in Dawn04. There has to be something else about it.

Someone help me to understand, 'cause I'm lost. :lol:

[slickwilly13]

Another Freddy pic from a side view.




http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/19737

[JDFP]

Against my better judgement, I'll open this can of worms....

Now, here's what I really find interesting - and I'll put this thought out to all of you who are big RZ Halloween & GAR fans - why is it that Rob can change almost every bit of Halloween aside from character names and his mask and it's perfectly fine, however... Dawn04 was EXACTLY the same experience and yet most everyone rags on that film. Why? They brought it up to date, they changed the story around a bit but kept the "core" of the idea intact - just like what's being called for on NOES and exactly what RZ did with Halloween, but yet it's a bad thing for Dawn04??

Someone care to explain?

DO NOT use "running zombies" as the excuse - sorry, but they changed Michael Meyers and every other character in Hallowen up so much from the original, runners vs. shamblers is basically the same kind of change done in Dawn04. There has to be something else about it.



Well, I personally despise most remakes. But, I really digged R.Z.'s re-imagining of "Halloween" and I really enjoyed the re-imagining of "Dawn of the Dead" as well, even if others here may attempt to give me a good flogging for saying it. But, to your point, I think you can sum it up like this...

To alot of people here, "Dawn of the Dead" is their most favorite horror film and, in some cases, most favorite film ever made. For anyone to take something that is their most favorite of anything and attempt to change it, there's really only going to be one reaction, and that's anger and frustration. At first I thought "How dare they!" as well, but after actually seeing the film and realizing that it was something completely different all together I actually enjoyed it for the adventure/action flick (with zombies) that it is, as opposed to Romero's original horror flick. In of itself, I think Dawn 04 is an enjoyable film to kick back and turn off your mind for a few hours for the fun of it (while trying to ignore the mostly, except Johnny Cash, awful soundtrack).

Advsersely, if they had attempted to make "Dawn 04" the same as the original masterpiece (the characters the same, the plot the exact same, only "modernizing" the story but everything remaining basically identical) then I would have never gone to see it or have any interest in seeing it. I've already seen "Dawn" and love it, what's the point in seeing an identical remake that is the same as the original except with people wearing contemporary clothes and living in a more contemporary mall? Pointless. The reason that I enjoyed "Dawn 04" was the same reason that so many others dislike it (and R.Z.'s "Halloween" I suppose) in that it doesn't attempt to be the same thing other than keeping a similar plot and some similar characters it branches out into some fresh territory/ideology within itself. It's a unique vision of the similar ideology.

Is it as good as the original? I don't think so, but I don't attempt to compare it because it's not the same thing. It's a completely different outlook on the same perspective.

However, the "Day" remake was absolute shit, and there's no arguing that.

j.p.

[clanglee]

Now, here's what I really find interesting - and I'll put this thought out to all of you who are big RZ Halloween & GAR fans - why is it that Rob can change almost every bit of Halloween aside from character names and his mask and it's perfectly fine, however... Dawn04 was EXACTLY the same experience and yet most everyone rags on that film. Why? They brought it up to date, they changed the story around a bit but kept the "core" of the idea intact - just like what's being called for on NOES and exactly what RZ did with Halloween, but yet it's a bad thing for Dawn04??

Someone care to explain?

:

Couldn't tell ya. . . .I like both movies. I thought they both were great examples of taking an original source material, keeping it familiar, and changing it enough to be interesting. The only real problem I had with H2 was the fact that Michael Myers was grunting and shouting when he was killing people. I much prefer the silence of the original MM.

[LouCipherr]

Understood, JP, and I agree for the most part. I think my thoughts on Halloween were spot on how you described most other people's thoughts on the original Dawn. The part I struggle with is, I think Snyder did a better job on his remake than Rob, but I don't know why that is. Again, it might be my Carpenterism kicking in (I'm a huge fan, mostly of his earlier work), but I can't really put my finger on it.

I still see this though: In Dawn04, it's the mall, zombies, and a survival flick. In RZ's Halloween, it's Michael, his mask, and his killing spree - other than those key elements in both films, everything else has been changed. They both parallel each other in that way. RZ's version of H1 (lets stick with that for now) differs just as much as Snyder's Dawn04 did to the original, yet, everyone (you are an exception, as I'm sure there will be a few others, but the overall majority will not) praises RZ's Halloween and bashes Dawn04. It just seems like a major contridction to me. They both approached the remake in the exact same manner, but one is considered fantastic, the other a pile of dog crap. *scratches head in confusion*

Y'know, I probably could've enjoyed RZ's Halloween.....

That is, if John Carpenter had never made the original. :lol:


The only real problem I had with H2 was the fact that Michael Myers was grunting and shouting when he was killing people. I much prefer the silence of the original MM.

That was only one of many issues I had with RZ's H2, but I have to agree - the silent stalker was much scarier than the grunting, Big Daddy-like version.

[bassman]

My answer is simple. I don't like the original Halloween, so the remake improved on it. I like the original Dawn, and the remake did not improve on it.

I've warmed up to Dawn04 in recent years though. It doesn't deserve to be in the same category as the original, but it's a decent action film with zombies thrown in.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Anyone know what time it is? :p

[BillyRay]

Time to do the Freddy?

http://www.i-mockery.com/blabber/pics/fat-boys-are-you-ready-for-freddy.jpg

[clanglee]

She has had her norks out before. Only twice so far, mind ... I think it was part of her "image change" period (which included TCM2003). She also got her norks out in some recent movie called Powder Blue where she played a stripper. ;)
??????
http://forum.homepageofthedead.com/picture.php?albumid=21&pictureid=423
??????

[MinionZombie]

Someone care to explain?

DO NOT use "running zombies" as the excuse - sorry, but they changed Michael Meyers and every other character in Hallowen up so much from the original, runners vs. shamblers is basically the same kind of change done in Dawn04. There has to be something else about it.

Someone help me to understand, 'cause I'm lost. :lol:

Go to my blog, search for 110 reasons in 110 minutes why Yawn04 sucks. :D

[LouCipherr]

Go to my blog, search for 110 reasons in 110 minutes why Yawn04 sucks. :D

So it was ok what they did to Halloween, but following the same exact formula, it's not ok for Dawn04. Believe me, I could come up with the exact same list for H1 as you did for Dawn04, so....... I'm still confused. :lol:

[darth los]

So it was ok what they did to Halloween, but following the same exact formula, it's not ok for Dawn04. Believe me, I could come up with the exact same list for H1 as you did for Dawn04, so....... I'm still confused. :lol:

We all know the reason lou so I don't even know why you're pressing.

However, if you're just trying to get the hypocrisy on record, that i can respect.

C'mon, MZ say it !! Double Standard. Try it. It rolls right off the toungue.

And I can't believe this is going to turn into one of those threads.

:cool:

[MinionZombie]

Lou, Darth ... quit trying so hard. :p

I'm not saying RZ's H1 and H2 don't have flaws, indeed I listed many about H2 - yet, as I also said when blogging about it, it strangely compelled me and I ended up respecting it ... I'm just saying that I actually quite like them both.

Yawn04 can suck the shit out of a donkey's butt-chute for all I care ... motherfucker had that stupid bitch chasing after "Chips" in it for starters. :elol:

[LouCipherr]

We all know the reason lou so I don't even know why you're pressing.

However, if you're just trying to get the hypocrisy on record, that i can respect.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e104/LouCipherr/Smileys/shhh.gif


MZ - I'm not "trying too hard" - my point is valid: both H1 & Yawn04 (as you like to call it :lol:) took the same approach, yet one is praised and one is damned. Whether you want to admit it or not, Snyder is a better filmmaker than RZ, even with Dawn04 included.

That brings us to NOES - so what if they repeat or include some of the original sequences? I can guarantee you, even if they do reuse many of them, they will be quite a distance from the original. Not to mention, I bet we're in for some surprises in the remake of NOES that were not in the original too.

We shall see.

[DjfunkmasterG]

When William Forsythe character died, H1, RZ's version, began to suck major ass. It plodded along, dragged, and was a complete snooze fest.

Don't make LOU and I come up with 110 reasons why H1 (2007) Sucks MZ.

You know we will do it.

[LouCipherr]

You know we will do it.

:lol: http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e104/LouCipherr/Smileys/shhh.gif

[darth los]

Lou, Darth ... quit trying so hard. :p

I'm not saying RZ's H1 and H2 don't have flaws, indeed I listed many about H2 - yet, as I also said when blogging about it, it strangely compelled me and I ended up respecting it ... I'm just saying that I actually quite like them both.

Yawn04 can suck the shit out of a donkey's butt-chute for all I care ... motherfucker had that stupid bitch chasing after "Chips" in it for starters. :elol:

But MZ, then everyone will know I'm just an internet gangsta. :shifty:


And the chips thing is definitely the dumbest shit I've ever seen on celluloid. The only purpose for that was to advance the story and have them in an impossible position, moving at a frenetic pace in which a bunch of things could and did go wrong.

I'll say it again. It can't sniff the original's jockstrap but it's not as bad a fim as some make it out to be.

Lou is just pointing out, and imo rightly so, the incosistencies in the reviews some have given dawn 04' vs. Rz's H. considering that they both were for all intents and purposes constructed in the same way.

:cool:

[DjfunkmasterG]

Lou is just pointing out, and imo rightly so, the incosistencies in the reviews some have given dawn 04' vs. Rz's H. considering that they both were for all intents and purposes constructed in the same way.

:cool:



yeah. how do you like them apples? :D

[MinionZombie]

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e104/LouCipherr/Smileys/shhh.gif


MZ - I'm not "trying too hard"

I'm looking down the internet pipe right now and I can see the sweat on your brow ... bit of a limited view, mind, being a pipe and all.


Don't make LOU and I come up with 110 reasons why H1 (2007) Sucks MZ.

You know we will do it.

I double dares ya. :sneaky:

...

It's just my opinion folks, and I've articulated it on my blog as best I can. H1 and H2 (especially H2) aren't paragons of perfection by any means ... and Yawn04 would be a sucky movie regardless of title, before that lazy swipe is made again by the pro-Yawn crowd. It plays to the lowest common denominator and throws protagonists at the screen like Labour does tax payer's money at any and all problems ... like flinging dysentary at the side of a barn.

[Tricky]

Ive never liked the freddy movies, even when I was a teenage horror nut I found them crap, and last night I caught Wes Cravens new nightmare on TV and watched it due to lack of anything else on, and it was equally bad :rockbrow:

[ProfessorChaos]

Ive never liked the freddy movies, even when I was a teenage horror nut I found them crap, and last night I caught Wes Cravens new nightmare on TV and watched it due to lack of anything else on, and it was equally bad :rockbrow:

i'm with ya there, man. i have never even been able to sit through an entire freddy film. i've seen bits of a few of them, but they've just always come off as mindless (not quite as mindless as the saw films, mind you) and silly. freddy and his shit one-liners only make 'em worse.

[Tricky]

i'm with ya there, man. i have never even been able to sit through an entire freddy film. i've seen bits of a few of them, but they've just always come off as mindless (not quite as mindless as the saw films, mind you) and silly. freddy and his shit one-liners only make 'em worse.

They're not helped by how poorly the special effects have aged, but regardless of that the acting is appalling throughout the series, and freddy himself becomes more of a parody of himself the further the series progresses, even in the first one he was like a crap parody of other slasher movies that came before it!

[MinionZombie]

For me, the scariest thing about the Freddy franchise is how they turned a child murdering paedophile into a cuddly rogue with toys of him sold directly to children. :rockbrow:

Nightmare 1 and 3 are the ones worth bothering about, 2 is okay, and 7 is so goddamned slow until the final act when it finally becomes interesting - and indeed New Nightmare was the creepiest Freddy had been in donkey's years.

I recently watched Nightmare 4 through 7 you see, and goddamn, they're pish. 4 and 5 are closely linked and just suck, and 6 is absolutely terrible - attacked by a road map, anyone? It's beyond retarded that flick, and then as I just said, New Nightmare - while a decent idea - was far too slow paced. It was mostly tedious until Freddy finally got his act together in that bad ass trench coat.

So considering how shit many of the sequels were, the remake will easily blow those out of the water ... but will it best the original? Somehow I doubt it - it's the rule of these remakes, they never best the original.

[shootemindehead]

At least Rob Zombie updated the actual original film with his 'Halloween' remake. Neither of which I think are good movies, IMO.

However, all Snyder did, was take a great location idea and ripoff the Romero title. The rest of the film has fuck all to do with the original. It's a cynical cash-in of a well known and respected title on order to get more money.

The location didn't HAVE to be a shopping mall and the title didn't HAVE to be 'Dawn of the Dead', becasue it had nothing to do with 'Dawn of the Dead'.

[mista_mo]

The sequels to pretty much every other slasher flick are just as bad as any of the nightmare on elm street sequels. Good God, the Friday the 13th series is possibly home to the worst sequels in movie history.

As far as I am concerned however, there is only one NOES movie, and that is the original.

Also, Dawn 2004 wasn't that bad of a film at all. But you seem to be pretty militant in your hatred for it, and I can respect that, even if I disagree with most of your assessments of said film.

[AcesandEights]

Saw my first commercial on tv for this movie last night. I'm guessing I won't be seeing it in the theaters, but that's not a big surprise as I'm not a general horror movie aficionado.

[MinionZombie]

Pfft, the Friday sequels are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better than the Nightmare sequels.

#2 gives us Jason with the sack, and it's got that great early 1980s slasher vibe to it.
#3 wasn't as good by any means, but Jason rocks, he gets his hockey mask, it was done in 3D for camp value, picks up right after the second movie and the final act is boss.
#4 was the best of the sequels, continues right after the third movie, Savini's back on gore duty, the kids are entertaining and get hacked up in gleefully gruesome ways, and it's just generally badass.
#5 sucks, but has a very few moments ... two of which are bewb related.
#6 was a balls-out-swinging fun time - Alice Cooper, went for a more tongue-in-cheek vibe, stood out on its own, Zombie Jason is born.
#7 shamefully neutered by the MPAA, but the best Jason there ever was is given to us.
#8 I pretty much hated first time I saw it, but then upon a 2nd viewing recently I actually dig it quite a bit ... shamefully neutered again, but the final third is seriously awesome, and it's still Kane Hodder owning everybody!
#9 sucked balls.
#10 had some moments, and while I quite liked it originally, my opinion has sunk over the years.

FvJ was torturous ... bad, bad, bad movie.
F13th2009 ... ... an okay movie, but the shadow of TCM2003 loomed ridiculously large over it to its detriment, some of it was really enjoyable, and other parts were just lame. If they follow it up (I'm sure they will) then hopefully they'll learn from their mistakes ... the new guy playing Jason is cool though.

[darth los]

#2 gives us Jason... sack,


I couldn't read that long ass post. I blacked out when I heard Jason's sack. :p :lol:

Somebody's going to post that in their sig somewhere but the hell with it. :lol:

:cool:

[shootemindehead]

The sequels to pretty much every other slasher flick are just as bad as any of the nightmare on elm street sequels. Good God, the Friday the 13th series is possibly home to the worst sequels in movie history.

As far as I am concerned however, there is only one NOES movie, and that is the original.

Also, Dawn 2004 wasn't that bad of a film at all. But you seem to be pretty militant in your hatred for it, and I can respect that, even if I disagree with most of your assessments of said film.

I agree Mo, I think the original 'Nightmare on Elm Street' is a good film, it's classic status has been diluted with the truly appaling sequels.

As for 'Dawn of the Dead' (2004), I don't hate that film, I just see it as a cynical use of a popular (and better) movie's title and situation. But, in reality it's not really a re-make. It just rips-off certain items, because basically the writers were too lazy to come up with something original. There's no reason why the mall couldn't have been an Army Barracks or a prison or something and the title something COMPLETELY different. It still would have been essentially the same film.

I actually think the film is OK. But, has some really dumb parts, uninteresting characters and rubbish zombies. In fact the best part of the film is the end credit sequence, except for that rubbish song.

[BillyRay]

As for 'Dawn of the Dead' (2004), I don't hate that film...


Oh, @#$%...a comment kind to Dawn'04....

EVERYBODY DUCK!!!
http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2009/06/12/zombieland-harrelson.jpg

[MinionZombie]

Long ass post? It's not even 16 full lines of text! :rolleyes:

People today, I tell ya...:sneaky:

[AcesandEights]

Long ass post? It's not even 16 full lines of text! :rolleyes:

People today, I tell ya...:sneaky:

Perhps U cld type like dis, MZ. :D

[shootemindehead]

Oh, @#$%...a comment kind to Dawn'04....

EVERYBODY DUCK!!!
http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2009/06/12/zombieland-harrelson.jpg


Huh wha?

Who said anything about kind?

But duck anyway. MZ's got his finger on the ban button again...I feckin know it.

[darth los]

Oh, @#$%...a comment kind to Dawn'04....

EVERYBODY DUCK!!!
http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2009/06/12/zombieland-harrelson.jpg



Did you READ the reast of his post? :rockbrow:

:cool:

[BillyRay]

Did you READ the reast of his post? :rockbrow:

:cool:


Around here, all it takes is a:



I don't hate that film


For the board to assplode.

Regardless of any negative criticism in the rest of the review.

Just observin'.

[Wyldwraith]

Just gonna chime in,
And say Rob Zombi made a horrific mockery of Halloween, and that I pray to the Gods of Hollywood that he's never allowed near any classic franchise ever again. I'm of the opinion that if RZ directs it, I can take a pass without missing ANYTHING I wouldn't want to bleach my brain to get rid of despite (or perhaps because) the brain damage involved in doing so.

Just my .02

P.S: Standing on it's own I don't think Dawn '04 is in amongst the WORST tier of movies I've ever seen. As a remake its the pits of course.

[ProfessorChaos]

^

isn't there supposed to be a rz version of "the blob" on the way? i know that doesn't qualify as a classic franchise, but i still think he should stick to his own material. (although i kinda enjoyed the first rz halloween...the 2nd one, not so much)

[MinionZombie]

Perhps U cld type like dis, MZ. :D

:hurl: It'll be a cold day in hell when I do that. Even when I text message I use proper words with grammar and all sorts.


But duck anyway. MZ's got his finger on the ban button again...I feckin know it.

:elol: It's an itchy finger, so it is...:elol:

j/k :p


^

isn't there supposed to be a rz version of "the blob" on the way? i know that doesn't qualify as a classic franchise, but i still think he should stick to his own material. (although i kinda enjoyed the first rz halloween...the 2nd one, not so much)

So I've heard, and aye, I do wish he'd just make T-Rex already. It's an original piece and up his alley, so do that for crying out loud. Enough with the remakes. Heck, The Blob already got remade ... speaking of which, I should check out The Blob's remake again.

[LouCipherr]

Don't make LOU and I come up with 110 reasons why H1 (2007) Sucks MZ.

You know we will do it.




I double dares ya. :sneaky:



Ok DJ, you heard the man. MZ, Give us a few weeks to plan out a time to get together, and I bet we can come up with 220 reasons why it bites the big one. :lol:


BTW: MZ, I wasn't trying to single you out in particular with the whole Dawn04 & H1 thing. I know many who share the same opinion. Lets just say I find it weirdly interesting. ;)

[DjfunkmasterG]

Ok DJ, you heard the man. MZ, Give us a few weeks to plan out a time to get together, and I bet we can come up with 220 reasons why it bites the big one. :lol: ;)

I can't say we will come up with 220 reasons, but I am sure 110 won't be a problem. However, if we cross the threshold of 110, look out... it could be a doozy. :D

[LouCipherr]

I can't say we will come up with 220 reasons, but I am sure 110 won't be a problem.

Then you're not trying hard enough. :lol:

[DjfunkmasterG]

Then you're not trying hard enough. :lol:

Well, it depends if I can't stand sitting through that retched excuse for a movie. I mean I don't mind sitting and watching a movie again, but when I think the movie sucks balls... I try not to watch it unless someone is holding a gun to my head.

[darth los]

Perhps U cld type like dis, MZ. :D


It wasn't that it was too long for me. You should see the legal documents I have to read.


It's just that it was all unnescessary after he came out with the phrase "Jason's sack".

What other selling point do you need?

As mike would say, the rest of the post was just "keyboard masturbation". :lol:

:cool:

[MinionZombie]

I can't say we will come up with 220 reasons, but I am sure 110 won't be a problem. However, if we cross the threshold of 110, look out... it could be a doozy. :D

Will you also note the things you like?

Now before you say it, I have considered ... perhaps with a torturous mindset ... of doing a "things I inexplicably like about Yawn04" list, but I've not been masochistically-minded enough to do so. :lol:

It'd be a pretty short list, I'm sure.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Will you also note the things you like?

Now before you say it, I have considered ... perhaps with a torturous mindset ... of doing a "things I inexplicably like about Yawn04" list, but I've not been masochistically-minded enough to do so. :lol:

It'd be a pretty short list, I'm sure.

If you do a list of what you like I will do a list of what i like... Although I can't speak for Lou... oh and BTW, his wife is joining in, and his wife hates it more than him and I do. :D

[shootemindehead]

Don't do it MZ!

It'll only end up as a ying yang list..

1. It's short! :hyper:

But not short enough :rant:

2. It's called 'Dawn of the Dead' :hyper:

But, it's not 'Dawn of the Dead' :rant:

3. It's got zombies! :hyper:

But, they're not really zombies :rant:

[krakenslayer]

This has probably been done to death on here but I really can't be bothered reading five or six pages of posts to find the answer, so here goes: what's they justification for re-casting the Freddy role? They're clearly going for the same look at the original and the age of the actor is irrelevant when he's under an inch of latex...

[LouCipherr]

Will you also note the things you like?


When we see yours for Dawn, then possibly, yes. :p That's if I can find ANYTHING redeeming about it, which at this point, I can't say I do. Actually, wait, scratch that - I can think of one shot in the film I really liked, but that's about it.

Until then, I think we're going to have to chop down a rain forest for enough paper to write the things I despise about this flick. :lol:


oh and BTW, his wife is joining in, and his wife hates it more than him and I do.

He's not kidding - if you think I loathe that film, just wait. :D

[MinionZombie]

This has probably been done to death on here but I really can't be bothered reading five or six pages of posts to find the answer, so here goes: what's they justification for re-casting the Freddy role? They're clearly going for the same look at the original and the age of the actor is irrelevant when he's under an inch of latex...

Same look? The new Freddy is definitely more "burn victim realistic" ... it feels more "actual" rather than "designed" like the old school Freddy did (or at least, how he became).

They also specifically wanted to go darker, and a lot of fan folk out there - when they heard of a remake - said it should be Hayley, so Dunes looked him up and cast him. No doubt it was his performance as Rorschach that got him the gig.


Don't do it MZ!

:D

[darth los]

Don't do it MZ!

It'll only end up as a ying yang list..

1. It's short! :hyper:

But not short enough :rant:

2. It's called 'Dawn of the Dead' :hyper:

But, it's not 'Dawn of the Dead' :rant:

3. It's got zombies! :hyper:

But, they're not really zombies :rant:


Some people are never satisfied. :rolleyes:

And some just wait and see what the film is like so they can jump on the opposite side and sayit would have been much better if they did it the other way.

:cool:

[fulci fan]

Same look? The new Freddy is definitely more "burn victim realistic" ... it feels more "actual" rather than "designed" like the old school Freddy did (or at least, how he became).

They also specifically wanted to go darker, and a lot of fan folk out there - when they heard of a remake - said it should be Hayley, so Dunes looked him up and cast him. No doubt it was his performance as Rorschach that got him the gig.

:D

I think the new Freddy looks like he has down syndrome. Bad design.

[bassman]

I think the new Freddy looks like he has down syndrome. Bad design.

So do all the other NOES fans that are going to hate it no matter what just because it's new.:p

I think the complaints about Freddy's new look are just nitpicking. Stiped shirt, hat, burned face, and gloves. The same character is there. And he's damn near the same as the original.

If they had mad the EXACT same face over again for this new flick....everyone would be complaining that it's not something new.:lol:

[MinionZombie]

I think the make up looks better to be honest. It's looks freaky as fuck ... like I was saying, "realistic burns victim" look ... unsettling.

[shootemindehead]

Some people are never satisfied. :rolleyes:

And some just wait and see what the film is like so they can jump on the opposite side and sayit would have been much better if they did it the other way.

:cool:

Would that be you?

Cos it wouldn't be me. I have better things to do than to sit through a film I know I'm going bitch about later.


:p

[fulci fan]

So do all the other NOES fans that are going to hate it no matter what just because it's new.:p

I think the complaints about Freddy's new look are just nitpicking. Stiped shirt, hat, burned face, and gloves. The same character is there. And he's damn near the same as the original.

If they had mad the EXACT same face over again for this new flick....everyone would be complaining that it's not something new.:lol:

I am not a fan of NOES or its following of fat, sweaty fans (if you are a fan, I am not saying that you are fat or sweaty) ;). From a makeup effects and character design standpoint, new Freddy isn't that impressive.

Also, since our favorite frat boy, Mike Bay, is involved, I am sure we will get the usual "No,no,no,no,no" and "go, go, go, go, move!".

Like it wasn't bad already that they are making another one. :annoyed:

[mista_mo]

I am not a fan of NOES or its following of fat, sweaty fans


http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj300/realmoseph/1270395198030.jpg

[shootemindehead]

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj300/realmoseph/1270395198030.jpg

Fulci Fan is right.

That Freddy make up sucks.

[darth los]

^^^

That pic is wrong on so many levels. And I don't think that stain is sweat. :stunned:

:cool:

[SymphonicX]

hmm I'm kinda of the opinion that Freddy should be portrayed as an effeminate weirdo with a chip on his shoulder rather than an evil death metal vocalist with burn marks....

know what i mean? I reckon it'd be far creepier if he was softly spoken yet committed untold acts of evil - like all kid murderers really...

[darth los]

an effeminate weirdo


You rang?


http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTQzMjYzODA0Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwMTM4MTY1._V1._ SX281_SY400_.jpg

:cool:

[LouCipherr]

If they had mad the EXACT same face over again for this new flick....everyone would be complaining that it's not something new.:lol:

Isn't that the truth.

I'll be honest, I think the makeup is "ok" but that's as far as it goes. When I saw the first full-on headshot of it, I thought "Why the hell does Freddy look chinese?!" There's something about the eyes that looks wrong to me. I can't really put my finger on it.

Not only that, when he talks in the few shots we see it, it looks like the only thing moving is his lips and everything else on his face is stationary. In the original, it looks like the prosthetics they put on Englund allowed his mouth/face area to move better (if that makes sense) making the effects more "real" and more a part of him - at least to me. It wasn't just lips moving under a mask of stone, so-to-speak.

Personally, I liked the original makeup better, but I'm still kinda stoked to see what they do with this flick. I don't think it should've been done, but I think their approach might be a winner here (I stress "might"). They're staying respectful to the original (which most remakes do not do), while changing it up a bit and bringing it up to date.

I'm still on the fence with this one though.

I just hope they they don't go with the "comedian" Freddy aspect like they did in all the movies after the first one. Freddy, in part 1, was scary - in the sequels that followed, he was nothing more than a burn victim comedian, and that's not scary nor funny.

[darth los]

Isn't that the truth.

I'll be honest, I think the makeup is "ok" but that's as far as it goes. When I saw the first full-on headshot of it, I thought "Why the hell does Freddy look chinese?!" There's something about the eyes that looks wrong to me. I can't really put my finger on it.

Not only that, when he talks in the few shots we see it, it looks like the only thing moving is his lips and everything else on his face is stationary. In the original, it looks like the prosthetics they put on Englund allowed his mouth/face area to move better (if that makes sense) making the effects more "real" and more a part of him - at least to me. It wasn't just lips moving under a mask of stone, so-to-speak.

Personally, I liked the original makeup better, but I'm still kinda stoked to see what they do with this flick. I don't think it should've been done, but I think their approach might be a winner here (I stress "might"). They're staying respectful to the original (which most remakes do not do), while changing it up a bit and bringing it up to date.

I'm still on the fence with this one though.

I just hope they they don't go with the "comedian" Freddy aspect like they did in all the movies after the first one. Freddy, in part 1, was scary - in the sequels that followed, he was nothing more than a burn victim comedian, and that's not scary nor funny.


Imo, the best films incorporate a bit of everything. A little comedy, drama , action etc.

The thing is to find the right formula.

:cool:

[bassman]

I just hope they they don't go with the "comedian" Freddy aspect like they did in all the movies after the first one. Freddy, in part 1, was scary - in the sequels that followed, he was nothing more than a burn victim comedian, and that's not scary nor funny.

They're definitely not doing a funny Freddy. I've seen interviews where everyone involved says they're making Freddy scary again. Not some fruity ER patient running around with a whoopie cushion.


I'm thinking this flick is going to surprise people. Not that it will be anything revolutionary, but I think anyone willing to see it with an open mind will be entertained. Most of this will be because of Haley. The guy is a phenomenal actor and I think people will be impressed with the final product.

It reminds me of when Heath Ledger was cast as The Joker. "Jack Nicholson is the ONLY Joker!" "GREAT...Brokeback joker!" "He played a fag so he can't be the Joker!":rolleyes: We all know how that turned out...

[darth los]

They're definitely not doing a funny Freddy. I've seen interviews where everyone involved says they're making Freddy scary again. Not some fruity ER patient running around with a whoopie cushion.


I'm thinking this flick is going to surprise people. Not that it will be anything revolutionary, but I think anyone willing to see it with an open mind will be entertained. Most of this will be because of Haley. The guy is a phenomenal actor and I think people will be impressed with the final product.

It reminds me of when Heath Ledger was cast as The Joker. "Jack Nicholson is the ONLY Joker!" "GREAT...Brokeback joker!" "He played a fag so he can't be the Joker!":rolleyes: We all know how that turned out...


I know it was too much but let's not just dismiss the original character's "quirkiness."

They shouldn't make him a bland character in order to make it scary. Sue him, but freddy has personality, something that his other contemporary superhuman murderers lack.

Freddy could carry a film precisely because of that. Jason and Myers just show up for the kill and disappear again, rinse, repeat. Kinda boring and monotonous as lead characters truthfully.


It is the people they are trying to murder that MUST carry the day because the "stars" of the movie are incapable of doing so.

:cool:

[bassman]

I'm not saying he shouldn't have a personality, but he definitely shouldn't have the outlandish, off the wall personality that he had in the sequels. The first film nailed it. He was scary, but at the same time he also had that black comedy sort of "I'm having fun with this!" attitude.

[LouCipherr]

Imo, the best films incorporate a bit of everything. A little comedy, drama , action etc.

The thing is to find the right formula.

:cool:

This is true, and I think they had the right combo for the first one, but the sequels that followed made freddy a burned stand-up comedian and not like the child killer he was supposed to be. Then again, maybe I have the wrong impression of child killers? Perhaps they're all funny. :lol: Who knows.

Being a huge fan of the original, I'm cautiously optimistic about this flick. Of course, I said that before about Halloween and look where that got me. :lol:

We shall see.

[slickwilly13]

I plan on purchasing tickets Friday morning. I have a feeling it will sell out like the Friday the 13th remake did last year.

[Minerva_Zombi]

Word of advice... AVOID THIS MOVIE BY ALL MEANS! This is the first movie I've ever walked out of half way through. It is seriously mind-numbingly dull. The characters are dull. There is basically no plot. It is awful. Maybe worse than the Friday the 13th remake. And thats saying something.

[CooperWasRight]

I thought the Friday the 13th remake was not bad.... This was soulless and the script was extremely un even and structured totally wrong. FIX IT...I mean skip it.

[MinionZombie]

The IGN guys have said that it copies too much from the original movie - I was saying it looked that way from the trailers, perhaps I'm right on that front.

I'll see it at some time, but yeah, what's the point in remaking a movie mostly with the same content, but with flashier techniques?

[DjfunkmasterG]

oooooo goodie, another remake for Lou and I to rip apart. :elol:

[MinionZombie]

Just seen more review snippets ... there's not a lot of love for this flick.

Haley seems to be recognised as the best thing about the movie, but even then some are saying he doesn't get used enough. Smells like a rental to me, boys.

[rongravy]

hard to love, that's what i'd call it. i saw it last nite, it was a mixed bag of feelings... C+.

[LouCipherr]

oooooo goodie, another remake for Lou and I to rip apart. :elol:

I have not seen it yet, however.... from all the reviews I've been reading, this seems to be the case, Deej. :rolleyes:

[Darksider18]

i dont like the idea of robert englund being replaced. he made the entire series and he was there since the start. to take out the main star in a horror film is a bad move in my opinion. :/.

[LouCipherr]

I finally saw this wretched piece of shit, and just from that statement alone you can tell what I thought of it.

A complete waste of time and money. Just what I was afraid of. :mad:

Once again, Hollywood fucked up another remake. Nice job, guys.

[MinionZombie]

I'll check it out just to see it, but I'm glad I didn't pay to see it in the cinema when I had the chance to. Just all the footage I saw being directly pulled from the original seemed ENTIRELY pointless. The same shots just with a bigger budget and different faces and up-to-date effects? WTF is the point?

Did they try and 'TCM2003 it' like they did with F13th 2009?

[LouCipherr]

Just all the footage I saw being directly pulled from the original seemed ENTIRELY pointless. The same shots just with a bigger budget and different faces and up-to-date effects? WTF is the point?

To be honest MZ, that's not even what bothered me most about it. Matter of fact, using some of the scenes from the original (and not that many, mind you - I think the trailer showed all the repeated scenes in the flick) is the only thing I liked about it.

A few things that bothered me: 'Teenagers'who look older than some parents I know, none of which were worth giving a shit about and had no emotion. Extremely loud stingers/shreiks that try to hide a lack of suspense. I mean, it gets LOUD - the people in the theater weren't jumping at what was on screen, they were reacting to the scare of 1000db being blasted into their eardrums. Haley mumbled like he had a mouth full of dogshit... The makeup? Sure, it looked like a real burn victims - ummm, after it starts to heal! Has Freddy been healing in hell? Go google 3rd degree burns and see if they looked at all like Freddy's new makeup. One other thing about the makeup - you could just tell it was prosthetics on his face. At least with Englund and the original NOES, the makeup looked real and moved with his face when he was emoting - Haley's makup looked like a solid mass of dried shit glued to his face and the only thing that moved was his lips. It looked more fake than Pam Anderson's tits!

There's so many problems with this flick I refuse to list them all. There'd be more things I hate on this list than Dj and I's "RZ's Halloween" and MZ's "Yawn04" list COMBINED!

AVOID AT ALL COSTS if you have any vested interest in the original.


The sad part is, I bet 100 to 1 there will be a sequel....and it does not deserve nor warrant one.

[bassman]

The sad part is, I bet 100 to 1 there will be a sequel....and it does not deserve nor warrant one.

I'm not so sure. You would think a sequel to their Friday the 13th remake would have been a given, but I hear they're not doing it.

Haven't seen the film yet, but as someone that doesn't have much invested in the original...I'm still holding out a bit of hope. Reading so many bad reviews makes it tough, though.

Platinum Dunes. Unless they get their shit together fast, they're going to be known as the company that ruined all 70's and 80's franchises. Now they're working on a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles remake. :dead:

[LouCipherr]

I'm not so sure. You would think a sequel to their Friday the 13th remake would have been a given, but I hear they're not doing it.

True - and perhaps I'm jumping the gun on it, but y'know, I've just come to expect such pathetic, stupid moves by hollyweird that I expect nothing less of them. :(

[DjfunkmasterG]

So tell us how you really feel! :lol:

"HA HA TOM. I FLOOD LAB, YOU CLEAN UP." WW

[LouCipherr]

So tell us how you really feel! :lol:

"HA HA TOM. I FLOOD LAB, YOU CLEAN UP." WW

You just had to go there, didn't you? :lol:

Dude, I'm telling you, how they passed that off as making "Freddy scary again" I have no idea.. He wasn't scary, but the film was certainly laughable.

[Ghostdude]

NOES Remake sucked!
It was boring!
There was no attempt to make it scary at all.

[Darksider18]

I still stick to my opinion that the remake sucks ass (and haleys dog shit apparently), BUT.. I have to admit i did like 1 death scene. But it was the final one where freddy came through the mirror and grabbed The mothers head by her eye sockets and pulled her through the mirror and dissappeared. That was pretty awesome. But thats it! Lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avSmTvxKRxo