1,2 Freddy's coming for you: Welcome to the elm street thread

[†~AntiChrist~†]

The saw series was good though..Why didnt you like it?

 

[RedIsNotBlue]

It would be hilarious if Johnny Depp ended up playing the new Freddy.

 

[Balthus Dire]

Why do they always insist on rebooting the franchise? It's entirely possible to make another Nightmare on Elm Street movie and make it darker without rebooting it, take a look at New Nightmare.

And if Robert Englund isn't playing Freddy they should ****can this movie right away, because recasting a horror icon like Freddy would kill this franchise.

 

[Cagefighterkip]

It would be hilarious if Johnny Depp ended up playing the new Freddy.

great choice - but it'll never happen nowadays. get perlman or something.

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

It would be hilarious if Johnny Depp ended up playing the new Freddy.

I support this idea.

 

[Mr. Credible]

they were talking about using Ben Foster to replace Englund over on AICN. it's an interesting choice, for sure, but not half bad. besides, Englund's become something of a parody of himself nowadays.

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

they were talking about using Ben Foster to replace Englund over on AICN. it's an interesting choice, for sure, but not half bad.

Not a bad pick.

 

[Cagefighterkip]

they were talking about using Ben Foster to replace Englund over on AICN. it's an interesting choice, for sure, but not half bad. besides, Englund's become something of a parody of himself nowadays.

ben fosters a good choice and not entirely impossible i think; if he can make crap like 30 days of night, he can make ANOES remake

 

[dark_b]

ben foster?
the guy from alpha dog,x-men,....

yeah i can see it. a crazy guy who smiles and kills little kids?

yeah could work.

 

[Fran]

I can totally see Ben Foster as Krueger.

 

[Super Kal]

I can too

 

[hippie_hunter]

Englund may be back for Elm Street redo

The bad news? They're still planning to reboot the "Elm Street" series.

The good news? We mightn't be getting a new Freddy after all.

We've heard today that Robert Englund will be approached about reprising his role as Fred Krueger in the "Nightmare on Elm Street" remake. And so they bloody well should.

Man, did I get off the phone and wipe my brow. That's good news indeed. And can anyone imagine Englund actually knocking back the chance to play his one and only memorable character?

I don't think I'm as against the idea of remaking the film, as I am recasting the Dream killer, so if they bring back Englund, throw in a bit of an 'origin' story into the mix, and at least have Wes Craven oversee the production the idea won't stink as much - It'll still stink, if it's a remake of a perfectly good film they should simply 're-issue' at theatres, you just won't need a peg.

http://www.moviehole.net/news/20080131_englund_may_be_back_for_elm_st.html

 

[Lex Luthor]

What an interesting turn of events ...

 

[Warhammer]

I am not upset about a remake, and the possibility of Englund being Freddy again only makes me more excited for it.

 

[Mr. Credible]

meh. englund, as i've said, had become nothing more than a parody of himself in the last 4 or 5 movies and tv shows he's done...

now, whether or not that's a product of bad scripts/direction, or him just sucking is left to be seen, but i'd like to see someone else take the reigns. he's not the only one who can play a dead, dream haunting psycho, and i think many, many other actors could play freddy much better.

 

[Balthus Dire]

meh. englund, as i've said, had become nothing more than a parody of himself in the last 4 or 5 movies and tv shows he's done...

now, whether or not that's a product of bad scripts/direction, or him just sucking is left to be seen, but i'd like to see someone else take the reigns. he's not the only one who can play a dead, dream haunting psycho, and i think many, many other actors could play freddy much better.

No.

 

[Cagefighterkip]

I am not upset about a remake, and the possibility of Englund being Freddy again only makes me more excited for it.

woo-hoo!
seconded in a big bad way!

 

[Mr. Credible]

and please, no wes craven involvement... he used to be good, he's not anymore.

 

[Mr. Credible]

No.

sorry, he had his chance, what, 7 or 8 times? and he only got worse as he went.

time for someone else to give it a go, i say.

 

[Balthus Dire]

Had his chance??



....ummm, Robert Englund defined Freddy Krueger. He is the character. Every form of medium the character of Freddy Krueger appears in is based on Robert Englund's performance; the way he talks, jokes, moves...everything.

The films themselves got more and more over the top as they went along, but that's because the respective studios chose to go in a different direction; a less "dark" direction. I wouldn't say they got "worse", just that they were simply not scary. But they weren't really meant to be, other than the first one.

They tried the "let's make it dark" thing with New Nightmare. Is that the version of Freddy Krueger that comes to your mind when you think of NOES? No, it's the joking, demented version from the other NOES films.


Now, that being said...if they cast Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger again, a newer Elm Street film could be great if it's done right. A darker version could be really awesome, if they can actually make it scary.

But you can't sit here and tell me Robert Englund didn't take the role of Freddy and make it his own. Recasting him would be a mistake. If anything, just tone him down a little.

 

[Mr. Credible]

the only reason englund "defined" freddy is that he's the only one ever to get a crack at it.

i have no doubt that the right actor could bring a much better version of the character to the big screen.

 

[Lex Luthor]

I certainly cannot fault Englund for the direction the franchise went, and more importantly, succeeded in with the sequels during the mid to late 1980's. With each sequel, and rightfully so, New Line felt it had to make the film in question more over the top, and unique than the previous. And to a certain extent, they achieved this. Also, it should be noted that prior to Freddy vs. Jason, the most successful NOES film was "The Dream Master". Which more or less catered heavily on the MTV generation at the time. And obviously, it made good business sense to go with that angle.

Was Robert the cause for the shift in which the films took? Hell no. If anything, he was one of the key reasons why the films became as successful as they did and struck a cord with the audiences back then. Englund portrayed Freddy exactly as how he was directed to play Freddy for each of the succeeding sequels. And obviously, each director had his/her's own vision of how Freddy should appear for their movie. And Robert did nothing but do the best with the material he was dealt with. The only time there was any action to return Freddy to his original "Darker" origins, was in "The Dream Child". But it goes without saying that the script for that film, as well as direction, was severely lacking. And it also should be noted, that ALL horror franchise films that were released that year, also did poor business as well (HHalloween 5, Jason takes Manhatten, Leatherface, TMC III). So, again. I cannot fault Robert on that.

Personally, I would welcome Robert staying on as Freddy. And if we team him up with the right director, we could be pleasantly surprised with the results. Robert was certainly not the weak link in any way with the previous NOES films, and I really dont see him becoming anything other than a vital asset for a reboot if he is hired to reprise the role, that he has honestly made his own, once again.

 

[Warhammer]

the only reason englund "defined" freddy is that he's the only one ever to get a crack at it.

i have no doubt that the right actor could bring a much better version of the character to the big screen.

...that is like recasting Indiana Jones, Jack Sparrow, or John McClane. Those characters were defined by the actors that portrayed them. Their portrayal is the benchmark of the character. It doesn't matter if another actor could do a much better job at being those characters than the original actor could do, because in the end, not only will any actor after the original be compared to the original, but it was the original actor that defined that specific character. Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. Johnny Depp is Jack Sparrow. Bruce Willis is John McClane. Like it or not, any actor after them will always be viewed as an imitation first. Of course, there are the special exceptions to the rule like James Bond, Jack Ryan, or Batman.

That's just me...

 

[Cagefighterkip]

...that is like recasting Indiana Jones, Jack Sparrow, or John McClane. Those characters were defined by the actors that portrayed them. Their portrayal is the benchmark of the character. It doesn't matter if another actor could do a much better job at being those characters than the original actor could do, because in the end, not only will any actor after the original be compared to the original, but it was the original actor that defined that specific character. Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones. Johnny Depp is Jack Sparrow. Bruce Willis is John McClane. Like it or not, any actor after them will always be viewed as an imitation first. Of course, there are the special exceptions to the rule like James Bond, Jack Ryan, or Batman.

That's just me...

agreed w/mcclane, sparrow and indy... but i think (as great as englund is) if they had to recast - if u got a good actor (ben foster) - you could recast freddy in a good way. i love englund, but stil...

 

[bullets]

I like robert englund because he never chose to abandon the part. he could of went on and into a different direction but he was always there for freddy.
im glad freddy is back but i dont want a reboot.