I haven't seen these Freddy films in so many years that a lot of it is new to me again because i've forgotten so much of it. I found parts 1 & 2 boring, but tonight I saw part 3 and things finally picked up. :clap:

The only part I remembered from when I originally saw it was when the girl got killed with all the drug needles lol. I don't know why that triggered my memory! (I never did drugs :lol:)

The return of Nancy from part 1 was welcome and I think this film should've been part 2 and that actual part 2 debacle never made because it really had no connection to the first one while part 3 did.

I just didn't get how Nancy was there since at the end of part 1 she was locked in the car with her friends and Freddy took them away....so I guess that was a dream?

It seemed to be 5 years later but they put a gray streak in her hair to make her look older which I found weird because she'd still be only 22 or 23.....why try and make her look 40?! :confused::confused:

The kills were great but when the girl got her head smashed into the TV and the hospital worker found her, how on earth would they still consider that a suicide?! It was physically impossible for one person to do that to themselves!! Anyone with a brain could've seen it was a homicide! :lol:

I like how we learned Freddy's history and the awful way he came into existence. I had totally forgotten all about that so it was a shock to learn when I watched it tonight that he was "The product of 100 maniacs". :eek:

And the end where we learn who the old nun was, I feel completely stupid for not seeing that coming at all!! Usually I pick up on these things during films, but when it was revealed who she was I was like "Oh crap!" :eek:

I haven't seen part 4 yet so i'm curious to find out how they bring him back after burying his bones with the holy water that was supposed to rest his soul. But like Jason, they obviously find a way of course. :lol:

But no spoilers please! I won't watch it till next Saturday and I like to go in knowing as little as possible! :crazy::wave:

I haven't seen these Freddy films in so many years that a lot of it is new to me again because i've forgotten so much of it. I found parts 1 & 2 boring, but tonight I saw part 3 and things finally picked up. :clap:

Oh good. I'm glad you enjoyed part 3. Part 3 really picks up the Freddy history. We learn how he was conceived and what kind of man was his father. We also get the introduction of hypnocil which is reference again in a later Freddy movie.

The return of Nancy from part 1 was welcome and I think this film should've been part 2 and that actual part 2 debacle never made because it really had no connection to the first one while part 3 did.

I just didn't get how Nancy was there since at the end of part 1 she was locked in the car with her friends and Freddy took them away....so I guess that was a dream?

I agree part 2 never should have been made. I don't remember Jesse even being mentioned in the following movies so it was like the story never existed. If you remember in part 2, it is mentioned Nancy went crazy after her mom "killed" herself in the living room and she saw her boyfriend get murdered. I believe it was to be our interpretation that Nancy was dreaming in the end of part 1 and came out of it before Freddy could kill her.


It seemed to be 5 years later but they put a gray streak in her hair to make her look older which I found weird because she'd still be only 22 or 23.....why try and make her look 40?! :confused::confused:


Well the gray streak is on the wrong side. In part 1, the streak is on her left side. Freddy scared her so bad that a streak on her left side turned white. I don't know how it switched to the right side for part 3 :crazy:


The kills were great but when the girl got her head smashed into the TV and the hospital worker found her, how on earth would they still consider that a suicide?! It was physically impossible for one person to do that to themselves!! Anyone with a brain could've seen it was a homicide! :lol:

I like how Freddy killed Phillip. Ripping his veins out and using him as a puppet was creative. That's one thing I really like about the Freddy movies. His kills are never the same like Jason and Michael. The Freddy movies do a lot of special effects for when he kills someone bringing art to the films. As for Jennifer's death, I like how Freddy says "welcome to primetime bitch" before shoving her in the TV :lol: I love some of his lines before his kills.

This is something part 2 lacked. There was no creativity to when Freddy killed someone. All part 2 was about was using Jesse as a vessel to bring Freddy back. I thought it was lame. Freddy didn't even act like Freddy in part 2. There were no clever lines and he at times looked confused when he was about to kill someone. The focus wasn't there like the other Freddy films.


I like how we learned Freddy's history and the awful way he came into existence. I had totally forgotten all about that so it was a shock to learn when I watched it tonight that he was "The product of 100 maniacs". :eek:

And the end where we learn who the old nun was, I feel completely stupid for not seeing that coming at all!! Usually I pick up on these things during films, but when it was revealed who she was I was like "Oh crap!" :eek:

This is one thing I really enjoy about the Freddy movies. They tell his history in the movies. We learn more about Freddy in the following films so this wasn't the only movie to discuss his history.


I haven't seen part 4 yet so i'm curious to find out how they bring him back after burying his bones with the holy water that was supposed to rest his soul. But like Jason, they obviously find a way of course. :lol:

But no spoilers please! I won't watch it till next Saturday and I like to go in knowing as little as possible! :crazy::wave:


You're not watching part 4 until next weekend? :eek: It's going to take you months before you get to Final Destination and Scream then :lol: I can't remember if you answered this, were you able to get Freddy vs. Jason? That's one of my favorite Freddy films.

I'm a fan of the Elm Street franchise, saw them all during their first run theatrical releases. Even the silly sequels like part 6 are never boring.

I love part 2, it kept the dark tone of the original before Freddy became jokey, and features some excellent make up effects by Marc Shostrom

There's an excellent documentary on the franchise titled Never Sleep Again, well worth checking out.

I love part 2, it kept the dark tone of the original before Freddy became jokey, and features some excellent make up effects by Marc Shostrom

There's an excellent documentary on the franchise titled Never Sleep Again, well worth checking out.

I'm a huge fan of Freddy. I like the direction they took Freddy starting with part 3. He may appear jokey or cartoonish at times, but he became a true psychopath getting pleasure out of his kills. As I mentioned previously, his kills are always different. It's like he needs that creativeness in order to keep killing. When looking at other horror villains like Jason and Michael, it's always the same weapon and same way. It never changed. I like that Freddy always had something new each time.

I'm not a fan of documentaries but I'll check that out. Thanks for the suggestion :wave:

A warning, the documentary is close to 4 hours long, but like it and the Friday The 13th one, I break them up instead of trying to watch in one sitting.


Of the three big slasher franchises from the 80s, Elm Street is the most consistent, the back story always felt like it was being built upon, where the one's for Jason and Michael they were constantly changing things.

Elm Street had the advantage of everything being created by Freddy's mind in nightmares, there were no limits to what they could do killwise, and some of the best of the effects artists worked on that franchise.

I agree part 2 never should have been made. I don't remember Jesse even being mentioned in the following movies so it was like the story never existed. If you remember in part 2, it is mentioned Nancy went crazy after her mom "killed" herself in the living room and she saw her boyfriend get murdered. I believe it was to be our interpretation that Nancy was dreaming in the end of part 1 and came out of it before Freddy could kill her.

Yeah, I remember when that was mentioned in part 2 and wondered why it was said that she went crazy instead of being killed because of that final scene in part 1. I think they should've showed her waking up before it was over so we'd know it was a dream and to not take it literally.

Well the gray streak is on the wrong side. In part 1, the streak is on her left side. Freddy scared her so bad that a streak on her left side turned white. I don't know how it switched to the right side for part 3 :crazy:

I hadn't even noticed the grey streak in part 1! I thought it was something they gave her for part 3 just to age her, but if she had it in part 1 i'll have to have a look again because I didn't even see it then! :eek:


I like how Freddy killed Phillip. Ripping his veins out and using him as a puppet was creative. That's one thing I really like about the Freddy movies. His kills are never the same like Jason and Michael. The Freddy movies do a lot of special effects for when he kills someone bringing art to the films. As for Jennifer's death, I like how Freddy says "welcome to primetime bitch" before shoving her in the TV :lol: I love some of his lines before his kills.

I liked the vein killing too but Freddy's one liners imo come off hammy and makes him less scary. I don't want my serial killers doing stand up acts. :lol:

This is something part 2 lacked. There was no creativity to when Freddy killed someone. All part 2 was about was using Jesse as a vessel to bring Freddy back. I thought it was lame. Freddy didn't even act like Freddy in part 2. There were no clever lines and he at times looked confused when he was about to kill someone. The focus wasn't there like the other Freddy films.

Another thing I didn't like about part 2 is how Freddy was brought into reality and scaring all the pool party kids. I think it's scarier to keep him restricted to the dream world and I hope in the rest of the parts he stays there more.


This is one thing I really enjoy about the Freddy movies. They tell his history in the movies. We learn more about Freddy in the following films so this wasn't the only movie to discuss his history.

I have a faint memory of when he was killed by the parents and burned alive in one of them. I'm guessing that's in part 4? And i'm still shocked that I didn't see coming that the nun was his mother. I feel dumb for not catching that during the film. :wallbang


You're not watching part 4 until next weekend? :eek: It's going to take you months before you get to Final Destination and Scream then :lol: I can't remember if you answered this, were you able to get Freddy vs. Jason? That's one of my favorite Freddy films.

I have so much dvd viewing lined up that I set certain ones for different days to watch. I'm buying up so many off Ebay because I want to have as many as I can get if a lot of these films and TV shows are going to be "revised" by the PC nazis.

So I set aside Saturday nights for my horror watching. I should finish the Freddy films by 8/1 and finish the Final Destinations by 9/5 and then start the Screams and finish those by 10/3 and just in time for Halloween, i'll start those. :lol:

I actually have TWO copies of Freddy vs. Jason! It was included in the Jason Goes to Hell dvd set and also in the 2nd set of Freddy films. :lol: I'm saving that for last because I want to have seen both series before seeing them go against each other.

I'm a fan of the Elm Street franchise, saw them all during their first run theatrical releases. Even the silly sequels like part 6 are never boring.

I love part 2, it kept the dark tone of the original before Freddy became jokey, and features some excellent make up effects by Marc Shostrom

There's an excellent documentary on the franchise titled Never Sleep Again, well worth checking out.

I too am not much of a fan of jokey Freddy. I like his anger much more but when he cracks those one liners, to me it comes off hammy and makes him less fearsome to me.

I'll have to get Never Sleep Again and check it out after I view the whole series. Thanks! :wave:

A warning, the documentary is close to 4 hours long, but like it and the Friday The 13th one, I break them up instead of trying to watch in one sitting.


Of the three big slasher franchises from the 80s, Elm Street is the most consistent, the back story always felt like it was being built upon, where the one's for Jason and Michael they were constantly changing things.

Elm Street had the advantage of everything being created by Freddy's mind in nightmares, there were no limits to what they could do killwise, and some of the best of the effects artists worked on that franchise.

I picked up on something in part 3 last night about no limits in the dreams and it was shown a little when the group went into their dreams together. They became whatever they wanted to be, so theoretically, couldn't any one of them become on Freddy's level if they simply dreamed it up and fought him as an equal?

This is what I was thinking when the one kid became a Wizard and started fighting Freddy....If he could become a Wizard, then surely he could become an evil creature with powers higher than Freddy in order to fight him off. If things are limitless for Freddy to kill them in dreams, the same should apply to his victims too.

I too am not much of a fan of jokey Freddy. I like his anger much more but when he cracks those one liners, to me it comes off hammy and makes him less fearsome to me.

I'll have to get Never Sleep Again and check it out after I view the whole series. Thanks! :wave:

The lighter funnier Freddy is what made him appeal to kids in real life, which is funny considering he was a child killer in the movies.

I picked up on something in part 3 last night about no limits in the dreams and it was shown a little when the group went into their dreams together. They became whatever they wanted to be, so theoretically, couldn't any one of them become on Freddy's level if they simply dreamed it up and fought him as an equal?

This is what I was thinking when the one kid became a Wizard and started fighting Freddy....If he could become a Wizard, then surely he could become an evil creature with powers higher than Freddy in order to fight him off. If things are limitless for Freddy to kill them in dreams, the same should apply to his victims too.

That's a good point, though I guess Freddy's powers came from something more than just the dream world like the teens which made him more powerful?

Of the three big slasher franchises from the 80s, Elm Street is the most consistent, the back story always felt like it was being built upon, where the one's for Jason and Michael they were constantly changing things.

I never knew this until cfr recently pointed out, the last Halloween movie got rid of the sibling relationship between Michael and Laurie. After reading some reviews, it appears John Carpenter regretted making them siblings in part 2 of Halloween and wanted to rewrite that. I think it's dumb because why is Michael after Laurie now if they're not brother and sister? 40 years later and he wants to kill a retired babysitter that's pushing 60 ohno:


I hadn't even noticed the grey streak in part 1! I thought it was something they gave her for part 3 just to age her, but if she had it in part 1 i'll have to have a look again because I didn't even see it then! :eek:

Yeah but it's on the wrong side for part 3. In part 1 it's on the left side. She still had her color on the right side. Maybe off screen, Freddy scared her again to where her hair turned white on the right side? :lookaroun

I liked the vein killing too but Freddy's one liners imo come off hammy and makes him less scary. I don't want my serial killers doing stand up acts. :lol:

:lol: The stand up acts could use some refreshers nowadays though :p


Another thing I didn't like about part 2 is how Freddy was brought into reality and scaring all the pool party kids. I think it's scarier to keep him restricted to the dream world and I hope in the rest of the parts he stays there more.

That's the scene where I think he looks confused and not sure what to do next. He wasn't even killing anyone at the pool. He was just running around which was odd. I like dream Freddy more where he can do whatever he wants because as he says, it's his world.


I have a faint memory of when he was killed by the parents and burned alive in one of them. I'm guessing that's in part 4? And i'm still shocked that I didn't see coming that the nun was his mother. I feel dumb for not catching that during the film. :wallbang

I'm not going to say what movie that scene is from because I don't want to give anything away. It does go into Freddy's history though in part 5 and 6. Don't feel dumb. I love when horror movies do that though. Sleepaway Camp is a great 80's horror film that had a huge shocker at the end. If you're able to find that one, get it.


I have so much dvd viewing lined up that I set certain ones for different days to watch. I'm buying up so many off Ebay because I want to have as many as I can get if a lot of these films and TV shows are going to be "revised" by the PC nazis.

So I set aside Saturday nights for my horror watching. I should finish the Freddy films by 8/1 and finish the Final Destinations by 9/5 and then start the Screams and finish those by 10/3 and just in time for Halloween, i'll start those. :lol:

I actually have TWO copies of Freddy vs. Jason! It was included in the Jason Goes to Hell dvd set and also in the 2nd set of Freddy films. :lol: I'm saving that for last because I want to have seen both series before seeing them go against each other.


I understand getting all the movies and shows you can while they're available. I just read an episode of The Golden Girls is getting removed because mud masks looked like they were doing blackface. It looks like every show will be examined before people are able to see it again on TV and streaming sites.

Are you going to watch the new Nightmare on Elm Street? It's honestly not that good if you are. Only Robert Englund can pull off Freddy.

I'm glad you got Freddy vs. Jason. Since Robert is done playing Freddy, I'm glad he went out with a bang. Nothing against Wes Craven's New Nightmare, but that is one trippy movie :lol:

I picked up on something in part 3 last night about no limits in the dreams and it was shown a little when the group went into their dreams together. They became whatever they wanted to be, so theoretically, couldn't any one of them become on Freddy's level if they simply dreamed it up and fought him as an equal?

This is what I was thinking when the one kid became a Wizard and started fighting Freddy....If he could become a Wizard, then surely he could become an evil creature with powers higher than Freddy in order to fight him off. If things are limitless for Freddy to kill them in dreams, the same should apply to his victims too.

Whenever someone tries that though, they end up getting killed. I think Freddy has too much power in the dream world to let someone overpower him.

The lighter funnier Freddy is what made him appeal to kids in real life, which is funny considering he was a child killer in the movies.

I was a kid when I started watching Freddy and enjoying the films. I do see how Freddy can be interpreted as a funny villain. After reviewing the movies as an adult, I also see Freddy gets a lot of pleasure when killing someone. He always switches it up because it's like he needs that creativity for his kills. Sort of like Jigsaw who is always creating different methods to torture someone. It's a game to them which can be scarier. They never want to stop and always wants their victim to be in total fear before they are killed.

I never knew this until cfr recently pointed out, the last Halloween movie got rid of the sibling relationship between Michael and Laurie. After reading some reviews, it appears John Carpenter regretted making them siblings in part 2 of Halloween and wanted to rewrite that. I think it's dumb because why is Michael after Laurie now if they're not brother and sister? 40 years later and he wants to kill a retired babysitter that's pushing 60 ohno:

:soapbox:
When I read about that, it really pissed me off because they basically erased the whole central point of the series by doing that. But the anger didn't last long before I said F it and just considered myself done with the series.

I mean, even back in the 80's they had Laurie "killed in a car accident" and her daughter was the object of Michael, then they brought Laurie back to life, scrapped the daughter and suddenly she had a son in H20.

THEN they had Michael kill her in the next installment, only to bring her back from the dead a second time to face off with him as a Social Security Grandmother. And like you said, why would he wait 40 years to go after a 60 something old lady who he chased for 5 minutes when she was a teen? Without that crucial family connection, it's pointless.

It just got so ludicrous and more like a daytime soap opera than a horror flick. I just can't forgive all those retcons and changes...and the incredible (and sad) part is that moviegoers continue filling theaters and lap it up like mindless kittens.

When I saw how much money that latest installment made, ($255 Million!) that's when I realized that nobody really cares about consistency and will swallow whatever Hollywood force feeds them. But I won't and will never watch that latest Halloween or the ones that come after as I refuse to have my intelligence insulted by Hollywood. I'm done.
As far as i'm concerned, Parts 1, 2, & H20 is the entire Halloween trilogy, and I will blissfully live with that ignorance. :cool:
:rant:



That's the scene where I think he looks confused and not sure what to do next. He wasn't even killing anyone at the pool. He was just running around which was odd. I like dream Freddy more where he can do whatever he wants because as he says, it's his world.

I think he threw someone at the pool party but come to think of it, I don't think he killed anyone either. Maybe he doesn't have powers to kill in the real world? What surprised me most was that he could exist and be seen in the real world. It seems to me like a rule was broken there. If Freddy only appears and can kill in dreams, how can he visible to a crowd of people while they're all awake and in reality? It's a head scratcher. :confused:


I'm not going to say what movie that scene is from because I don't want to give anything away. It does go into Freddy's history though in part 5 and 6. Don't feel dumb. I love when horror movies do that though. Sleepaway Camp is a great 80's horror film that had a huge shocker at the end. If you're able to find that one, get it.

I saw Sleepaway Camp in the theater when it came out in '83. I was 13 and got into all the R rated horrors and even the raunchy "Porky's" type movies so easily. Nobody cared back then. :lol:

But that ending...woah! It totally threw me and no way did I ever expect that coming! In fact, I still recall in my memory that moment when it was revealed and how shocked I was sitting there! :eek:


I understand getting all the movies and shows you can while they're available. I just read an episode of The Golden Girls is getting removed because mud masks looked like they were doing blackface. It looks like every show will be examined before people are able to see it again on TV and streaming sites.

It'll be any day now when they go after the All in the Family episode where Gloria has her baby and Archie is in blackface at the hospital...and everyone laughs at it. They're definitely going to get that one for sure.
(BTW it is a cringe inducing scene and there really is no point to have in there except to put Archie's character in blackface. I mean, if there was a point to it, I can understand...but there really isn't except to get cheap laughs and I personally don't care for it. I believe it's one time Norman Lear dropped the ball and goofed. If you see that episode, i'm curious what your take is on it. I personally could do without it and it's one of my least favorite episodes of the series.)

I have the whole series of AITF on dvd along with The Golden Girls so i'm good there. I just have to get my hands on Married with Children before they desecrate that one for being misogynistic. :rolleyes:

Are you going to watch the new Nightmare on Elm Street? It's honestly not that good if you are. Only Robert Englund can pull off Freddy.

I'm not a fan of reboots and hadn't planned on it, but I just peeked on it's Wikipedia page in the Production section and read they wanted Freddy to stop "cracking jokes" to make him more scary, so I may give that a look out of curiosity now.

I'm glad you got Freddy vs. Jason. Since Robert is done playing Freddy, I'm glad he went out with a bang. Nothing against Wes Craven's New Nightmare, but that is one trippy movie :lol:

I'm sure I saw New Nightmare back in the 90's, but really have no memory of it without looking it up online to remember. So when I watch that, it'll be new to me again. That's one of the perks of getting older...a lot of the films you saw as a 20 something are gone from memory so they're basically new all over again. :lol:


I was a kid when I started watching Freddy and enjoying the films. I do see how Freddy can be interpreted as a funny villain. After reviewing the movies as an adult, I also see Freddy gets a lot of pleasure when killing someone. He always switches it up because it's like he needs that creativity for his kills. Sort of like Jigsaw who is always creating different methods to torture someone. It's a game to them which can be scarier. They never want to stop and always wants their victim to be in total fear before they are killed.

As long as his kills are creative, I can forgive his one liners. I still find the silent killers to be scarier though. Saw is another series I want to revisit after i'm done with Freddy and Final Destination.

I remember the first 2 films were great, but then it devolved into how gross they can kill people and I don't like gore just for the sake of it. And the tortures got really bad that even I had to stop watching it lol. I think I stopped after the 4th one. It just got too dark and gross for my taste. Even I have my limits I guess. :lol:

:soapbox:
When I read about that, it really pissed me off because they basically erased the whole central point of the series by doing that. But the anger didn't last long before I said F it and just considered myself done with the series.

I mean, even back in the 80's they had Laurie "killed in a car accident" and her daughter was the object of Michael, then they brought Laurie back to life, scrapped the daughter and suddenly she had a son in H20.

THEN they had Michael kill her in the next installment, only to bring her back from the dead a second time to face off with him as a Social Security Grandmother. And like you said, why would he wait 40 years to go after a 60 something old lady who he chased for 5 minutes when she was a teen? Without that crucial family connection, it's pointless.

It just got so ludicrous and more like a daytime soap opera than a horror flick. I just can't forgive all those retcons and changes...and the incredible (and sad) part is that moviegoers continue filling theaters and lap it up like mindless kittens.

When I saw how much money that latest installment made, ($255 Million!) that's when I realized that nobody really cares about consistency and will swallow whatever Hollywood force feeds them. But I won't and will never watch that latest Halloween or the ones that come after as I refuse to have my intelligence insulted by Hollywood. I'm done.
As far as i'm concerned, Parts 1, 2, & H20 is the entire Halloween trilogy, and I will blissfully live with that ignorance. :cool:
:rant:

This was a John Carpenter thing. From what I read, he regretted making them siblings and wanted to redo that with these new films coming out. I agree it's ridiculous that he keeps chasing a retired babysitter that's pushing 60. I think the only reason the movies keep making money is because of Jamie Lee Curtis and John Carpenter. They're big in Hollywood. Rob Zombie's movies were horrible. They didn't even make that much money compared to John's films.

I think he threw someone at the pool party but come to think of it, I don't think he killed anyone either. Maybe he doesn't have powers to kill in the real world? What surprised me most was that he could exist and be seen in the real world. It seems to me like a rule was broken there. If Freddy only appears and can kill in dreams, how can he visible to a crowd of people while they're all awake and in reality? It's a head scratcher. :confused:

Remember in part 1 Nancy brought him to the real world? It was established in that film Freddy could cross over. With part 2, I didn't care for the kills or the story.


I saw Sleepaway Camp in the theater when it came out in '83. I was 13 and got into all the R rated horrors and even the raunchy "Porky's" type movies so easily. Nobody cared back then. :lol:

But that ending...woah! It totally threw me and no way did I ever expect that coming! In fact, I still recall in my memory that moment when it was revealed and how shocked I was sitting there! :eek:

That's what I love with some horror movies. The surprise ending we didn't see coming. Saw 2 and Sleepaway Camp are the only 2 that have done that for me so far.


It'll be any day now when they go after the All in the Family episode where Gloria has her baby and Archie is in blackface at the hospital...and everyone laughs at it. They're definitely going to get that one for sure.
(BTW it is a cringe inducing scene and there really is no point to have in there except to put Archie's character in blackface. I mean, if there was a point to it, I can understand...but there really isn't except to get cheap laughs and I personally don't care for it. I believe it's one time Norman Lear dropped the ball and goofed. If you see that episode, i'm curious what your take is on it. I personally could do without it and it's one of my least favorite episodes of the series.)

I have the whole series of AITF on dvd along with The Golden Girls so i'm good there. I just have to get my hands on Married with Children before they desecrate that one for being misogynistic. :rolleyes:

I watched those episodes. In part 1 it was established they were going for the blackface look. I thought it made sense for Archie to have it in part 2 because at the end of part 1, Edith and Archie couldn't find anything to wipe it off. I do think they went a little far with the woman in the hospital room claiming she's going to be rape and Archie saying even black men wouldn't want to rape her. I think that's a cringeworthy scene. I'm surprise that made it pass the censors for airing, but women weren't treated as equals back then. They're rarely treated as equals today.



I'm not a fan of reboots and hadn't planned on it, but I just peeked on it's Wikipedia page in the Production section and read they wanted Freddy to stop "cracking jokes" to make him more scary, so I may give that a look out of curiosity now.

If you watch it, let me know what you think of it.


I'm sure I saw New Nightmare back in the 90's, but really have no memory of it without looking it up online to remember. So when I watch that, it'll be new to me again. That's one of the perks of getting older...a lot of the films you saw as a 20 something are gone from memory so they're basically new all over again. :lol:


I usually skip New Nightmare in my rewatch. It's an intense different take on Freddy. They brought a lot of the regulars from part 1 for the movie but it's the story that I don't think was strong enough. They should have left part 6 as the end until Freddy vs. Jason IMO. Part 6 was a good ending.

As long as his kills are creative, I can forgive his one liners. I still find the silent killers to be scarier though. Saw is another series I want to revisit after i'm done with Freddy and Final Destination.

I remember the first 2 films were great, but then it devolved into how gross they can kill people and I don't like gore just for the sake of it. And the tortures got really bad that even I had to stop watching it lol. I think I stopped after the 4th one. It just got too dark and gross for my taste. Even I have my limits I guess. :lol:

Did you see part 4? I know the one liners bother some fans, but I laughed when he told Joey "now this is what I call a wet dream" and then drowns him in the water bed :lol:

I need to see the Saw movies after part 3. That's where I left off. I like Dina Meyer and since she's in some of the movies, I should at least see it for her.

This was a John Carpenter thing. From what I read, he regretted making them siblings and wanted to redo that with these new films coming out. I agree it's ridiculous that he keeps chasing a retired babysitter that's pushing 60. I think the only reason the movies keep making money is because of Jamie Lee Curtis and John Carpenter. They're big in Hollywood. Rob Zombie's movies were horrible. They didn't even make that much money compared to John's films.

That's funny because Laurie & Michael being siblings is the whole point of why he's chasing her. It's weird he apparently doesn't understand that.


Remember in part 1 Nancy brought him to the real world? It was established in that film Freddy could cross over. With part 2, I didn't care for the kills or the story.

There's so much I don't get in this series. Too many moments where i'm left scratching my head. So if Freddy can cross over, then it should be possible to kill him while he's in reality, no? How I see it is that he has all his powers in the dreams but while in reality, shouldn't those powers be gone and he'd be more human and able to kill? :lol:


That's what I love with some horror movies. The surprise ending we didn't see coming. Saw 2 and Sleepaway Camp are the only 2 that have done that for me so far.

I think I remember the Saw 2 ending, but not sure. It's been a long time since i've seen those films and will have to see them again after these are done. But that Sleepaway Camp ending is forever burned into my memory. :lol:


I watched those episodes. In part 1 it was established they were going for the blackface look. I thought it made sense for Archie to have it in part 2 because at the end of part 1, Edith and Archie couldn't find anything to wipe it off. I do think they went a little far with the woman in the hospital room claiming she's going to be rape and Archie saying even black men wouldn't want to rape her. I think that's a cringeworthy scene. I'm surprise that made it pass the censors for airing, but women weren't treated as equals back then. They're rarely treated as equals today.

Yeah, but even in part 1 where it was established they were putting on a blackface show for the lodge, it was a big stretch imo. By the 1970's that was long considered taboo and I just don't think that would've been acceptable to do as a show anywhere. Norman Lear just went for cheap gutter humor there and I wish they hadn't done it because it's not funny and makes Archie look stupid. Not to mention the whole thing is incredibly offensive, both to blacks and women. (though I do laugh when Archie makes that crack about not wanting to rape her.)


Did you see part 4? I know the one liners bother some fans, but I laughed when he told Joey "now this is what I call a wet dream" and then drowns him in the water bed :lol:

I watched part 4 last night and liked it. So far this is my favorite one---but again it left me scratching my head at things...for one, how did Freddy come back to life?! Because a dog peed fire on his grave?

They had already established that burying him on hallowed ground puts him to rest forever and suddenly one of the characters is pulled back to the junkyard in his dream with his dog, the dog pees fire on the grave and Freddy is miraculously put together before our very eyes. It was incredibly stupid unless I missed something important here?

None of how he came back made any sense. And another thing that confused me. Characters were just calling out names of their friends and wherever they were, they were suddenly pulled into the dream. I thought they all had to be together to do that like they did in the institution?

Now it's possible just to call a friends name and they get sucked into the nightmare too?! And when one of the students was killed in class, afterwards all the windows crashed in---shouldn't that have tipped off everyone something supernatural was going on? Yet everyone just sat there lol.

And then the ending....the girl just holds a freaking mirror at Freddy and if he sees his evil reflection that gets rid of him and all the souls he's captured are free....just from looking at himself in a mirror!! I was laughing at that because it was so dumb. :lol:

First burying his bones on hallowed ground kills him, now it's showing his face in a mirror. And now I can't wait to see how they bring him back again for the next part and how they're going to "kill" him in that ending.

And about the waterbed kill in part 4---maybe i'm just too logical and shouldn't be when I watch these kinds of films, but when the mother found him dead in the water bed, shouldn't she had been like "How the hell did he get in there in the first place?" The waterbed was still sealed so it should've been questioned how he managed to get killed in such a way? I think it would've been more effective to have the bed ripped open and the kid lying dead in the water.

But again....I know i'm being too logical. :lol:

I need to see the Saw movies after part 3. That's where I left off. I like Dina Meyer and since she's in some of the movies, I should at least see it for her.

I think I saw it up to part 4 and stopped because it was getting too dark for my taste. When I try watching again, i'll see if I can push through to see them all. Torture killing isn't my thing and those contraptions the characters wake up in are too scary for even me I guess. :lol:

That's funny because Laurie & Michael being siblings is the whole point of why he's chasing her. It's weird he apparently doesn't understand that.

I just read an article where John talks about how the new Halloween movie coming out will have the highest number of kills than any Halloween movie before. It's obvious he's going for gore and kills than the story of Michael.

There's so much I don't get in this series. Too many moments where i'm left scratching my head. So if Freddy can cross over, then it should be possible to kill him while he's in reality, no? How I see it is that he has all his powers in the dreams but while in reality, shouldn't those powers be gone and he'd be more human and able to kill? :lol:

The victims in the dreams can pull him into reality. Once he's in reality, he doesn't have his powers anymore. That's what Nancy was trying to do in part 1, but she failed. He was able to get back into the dream world by killing her mother.


I think I remember the Saw 2 ending, but not sure. It's been a long time since i've seen those films and will have to see them again after these are done. But that Sleepaway Camp ending is forever burned into my memory. :lol:

Sleepaway Camp will always be a favorite of mine just because of the shock value at the end. I never would have guessed Angela was the brother. I love that twist. Saw 2's ending reveals Amanda was in on it with Jigsaw. I didn't see that one coming either.


I watched part 4 last night and liked it. So far this is my favorite one---but again it left me scratching my head at things...for one, how did Freddy come back to life?! Because a dog peed fire on his grave?

I interpreted Freddy coming back to life by Kristen's fears. She kept saying Freddy was coming back. I think her fears are what gave Freddy enough juice to come back. We learn in a later sequel that if no one remembers Freddy or talks about Freddy, then he vanishes. Their fear and paranoia is what fuels him.

Did you notice the dogs name btw? Jason :lol:


None of how he came back made any sense. And another thing that confused me. Characters were just calling out names of their friends and wherever they were, they were suddenly pulled into the dream. I thought they all had to be together to do that like they did in the institution?

Kristen is able to pull anyone into her dreams. When Freddy killed her, she gave her power to Alice. Alice was then able to call people into her dreams like Kristen was.

And when one of the students was killed in class, afterwards all the windows crashed in---shouldn't that have tipped off everyone something supernatural was going on? Yet everyone just sat there lol.

It was the 80's. People reacted differently back then :lol::lol::p

And then the ending....the girl just holds a freaking mirror at Freddy and if he sees his evil reflection that gets rid of him and all the souls he's captured are free....just from looking at himself in a mirror!! I was laughing at that because it was so dumb. :lol:

I agree it was silly the way he was killed in this film. But the effects were cool and I like that there's always a different way each movie to kill Freddy. It's not the same each time.


And about the waterbed kill in part 4---maybe i'm just too logical and shouldn't be when I watch these kinds of films, but when the mother found him dead in the water bed, shouldn't she had been like "How the hell did he get in there in the first place?" The waterbed was still sealed so it should've been questioned how he managed to get killed in such a way? I think it would've been more effective to have the bed ripped open and the kid lying dead in the water.

I think she was just horrified to see her son dead. And that was just a bizarre way to kill someone. Wes Craven definitely wasn't going for logic when he made the Freddy movies. He was going for scares and thrills.

I think I saw it up to part 4 and stopped because it was getting too dark for my taste. When I try watching again, i'll see if I can push through to see them all. Torture killing isn't my thing and those contraptions the characters wake up in are too scary for even me I guess. :lol:

And that's the thing with the Saw movies. They go for gore majority of the time. I can handle gore, like the Hostel movies, but I like story to go with it so we understand what's going on. I think the Hostel movies did a good job of adding the background story for what was taking place.

I'm watching part 5 now and right after Freddy is born again in the church, and his mother tells her to find her in the tower to release her---Alice turns and is standing in a diner. How did she get from the dream to the diner?! Was she sleepwalking??

It's like as soon as she went back to reality, she's suddenly standing in the middle of the diner and her friend is yelling that she's 4 hours late for work. So she falls into her dreams when she's out and about now?

Then after that, her boyfriend is driving his truck and Freddy appears and makes him crash, and then kills him while he's riding his motorcycle. But then he's back in his pickup and crashes that in a fiery death in front of the diner and Alice sees it. So what happened to the motorcycle? And how did he get back in the pickup? What's a dream and what's real? It's so hard to decipher lol. And I thought he had no powers when in reality. This is why it's so hard to watch these films....they seem to keep changing the rules with each film.

It's hard to keep up.....EDIT:..Ok Alice just said that he used to come in her dreams but seems to have found another way. It's still so damn confusing lol.

I finished part 5---they keep changing things up. So babies can dream in the womb LOL. Just what in the hell can a fetus dream about if they've never even lived yet?! There's nothing for them TO dream about because their lives are still a blank! :lol:

I know I need to suspend all logic when watching these films, but I laughed when they said Freddy was being pulled into the unborn baby's dreams. It was just so absurd but I went with it for the sake of the story.

I still don't understand how Freddy managed to kill Alice's boyfriend while in reality because it went against what you said how he had no powers when out of dreams.

Unless the unborn baby pulled him into his dream while he was driving?! I just can't make any sense of it.

And there's a scene where we see what happened to Freddy's mother Amanda in the asylum that created Freddy's existence, but in that same scene we saw Freddy as a grown man in the same room right before she was going to be raped by the lunatics. How was he there as a grown man or was that a dream?!

This is my one gripe with the series---that it's difficult to tell whats a dream and what's reality.

The ending was confusing too...mother Amanda stuck Freddy back inside her lol. Then what? A door slams and it's over...I guess she took him to hell? The next one is The Final Nightmare so i'm curious again how he's going to come back.

Which leads me to how he came back in this one.....it was so weird. He was a baby and morphed into an adult. But HOW?! And where did he come from? He was obliterated when all the souls inside him was released in the last one so how did he just come back so easily? Was it because Alice dreamed him back? :confused:

After I finish the series, I want to see that Never Sleep Again film to see if all this is explained better.

All that said, I did enjoy part 5 the best of all of them so far.

I just read an article where John talks about how the new Halloween movie coming out will have the highest number of kills than any Halloween movie before. It's obvious he's going for gore and kills than the story of Michael.

I was already dead set on never seeing any of the new Halloween films, but this only reinforces it. We're living in a time where senseless violence is dangerously becoming the norm so the last thing I want to see in films is "gore and kills" for the sake of it. That's what turned me off to the Saw films.

I love horror, but I guess i'm more of the "suspense horror" over "gore horror". Seeing people getting killed for the sake of it, doesn't interest me and I think it's sad he's going down that road.

The first Halloween was all about the suspense and I believe it's what hooked so many into it. I wish he'd go back to that, but I guess it's a different world now and this is what audiences want. Geez, i'm sounding like my grandparents I guess. "There's too much violence in those films!" :grrbald::lol:



And that's the thing with the Saw movies. They go for gore majority of the time. I can handle gore, like the Hostel movies, but I like story to go with it so we understand what's going on. I think the Hostel movies did a good job of adding the background story for what was taking place.

Hostel is another one I stopped after the second one. I can also handle gore, but when it gets TOO dark I just can't go on. I can't explain it, but with both Saw & Hostel I feel a line was crossed as the series progressed and that made me stop. I just can't take that kind of violence in films.

I'm watching part 5 now and right after Freddy is born again in the church, and his mother tells her to find her in the tower to release her---Alice turns and is standing in a diner. How did she get from the dream to the diner?! Was she sleepwalking??

It's like as soon as she went back to reality, she's suddenly standing in the middle of the diner and her friend is yelling that she's 4 hours late for work. So she falls into her dreams when she's out and about now?

I'm not sure how to explain that one. It's revealed Freddy used Alice's baby to come back to life. I took it as Freddy pulled Alice into his dream using the baby to show her he's back again. Alice's baby is the reason Freddy came back to life.

Then after that, her boyfriend is driving his truck and Freddy appears and makes him crash, and then kills him while he's riding his motorcycle. But then he's back in his pickup and crashes that in a fiery death in front of the diner and Alice sees it. So what happened to the motorcycle? And how did he get back in the pickup? What's a dream and what's real? It's so hard to decipher lol. And I thought he had no powers when in reality. This is why it's so hard to watch these films....they seem to keep changing the rules with each film.

He was asleep the whole time. The motorcycle was all part of his dream. None of that was real. He fell asleep on his way to Alice and that's when Freddy entered his dream to kill him.

It's hard to keep up.....EDIT:..Ok Alice just said that he used to come in her dreams but seems to have found another way. It's still so damn confusing lol.

The other way he's coming is through her baby. Since he used Jacob, that made him connected to Freddy. That's how Alice is able to see him kill her friends and try to save them if she can.

I finished part 5---they keep changing things up. So babies can dream in the womb LOL. Just what in the hell can a fetus dream about if they've never even lived yet?! There's nothing for them TO dream about because their lives are still a blank! :lol:

I know I need to suspend all logic when watching these films, but I laughed when they said Freddy was being pulled into the unborn baby's dreams. It was just so absurd but I went with it for the sake of the story.

I don't know if I agree with this. I think babies can dream since the mother dreams. The baby is connected to the mother from the umbilical cord while inside the womb. I think whatever the mother dreams, the baby can see it as well when they're sleeping.

I still don't understand how Freddy managed to kill Alice's boyfriend while in reality because it went against what you said how he had no powers when out of dreams.

Unless the unborn baby pulled him into his dream while he was driving?! I just can't make any sense of it.

Right before the boyfriend crashes, he wakes up to see the truck drive into him. It's then that we see he was dreaming the whole scenario of being on a motorcycle.


And there's a scene where we see what happened to Freddy's mother Amanda in the asylum that created Freddy's existence, but in that same scene we saw Freddy as a grown man in the same room right before she was going to be raped by the lunatics. How was he there as a grown man or was that a dream?!

I interpreted this as Freddy showing Alice how he was conceived. He's there showing her what happened to Amanda and why he's so evil.


This is my one gripe with the series---that it's difficult to tell whats a dream and what's reality.

Except for part 2, I always took the scenes where Freddy kills as dreams. He's able to change forms for his kills which he can't do in reality.


The ending was confusing too...mother Amanda stuck Freddy back inside her lol. Then what? A door slams and it's over...I guess she took him to hell? The next one is The Final Nightmare so i'm curious again how he's going to come back.

Which leads me to how he came back in this one.....it was so weird. He was a baby and morphed into an adult. But HOW?! And where did he come from? He was obliterated when all the souls inside him was released in the last one so how did he just come back so easily? Was it because Alice dreamed him back? :confused:

We are to believe that's how Freddy dies this time. However, he always finds a way back. We learn this with each movie. Part 2 he came back using that kid as a vessel. Part 3 he came back using the last kids of Elm street. Part 4 he came back using Kristen's fears. Part 5 he comes back through Alice's baby. Part 6 you'll see how he comes back again. Part 6 is about Freddy's adult life. We're still not done learning about him.


After I finish the series, I want to see that Never Sleep Again film to see if all this is explained better.

All that said, I did enjoy part 5 the best of all of them so far.

I don't know if I like part 5 as much as part 3. I think 1, 3, and Freddy vs. Jason are the best of the Freddy series. I like em all, but those 3 are fun to watch again and again :) Even though these movies confuse the hell out of ya, I'm glad you're enjoying them :D

I'm not sure how to explain that one. It's revealed Freddy used Alice's baby to come back to life. I took it as Freddy pulled Alice into his dream using the baby to show her he's back again. Alice's baby is the reason Freddy came back to life.

So this occurred while she was walking around out and about? She just slipped into the dream while she was awake? That means her body was still moving since she was already inside the diner and her co worker said she was 4 hours late....so she couldn't have been standing there in that same spot for 4 hours. This tells me she falls into dreams but can still function in reality. :confused:

He was asleep the whole time. The motorcycle was all part of his dream. None of that was real. He fell asleep on his way to Alice and that's when Freddy entered his dream to kill him.

I didn't notice him falling asleep...then it makes sense. It's still hard to decipher which is reality and which is the dream state with these films.


I don't know if I agree with this. I think babies can dream since the mother dreams. The baby is connected to the mother from the umbilical cord while inside the womb. I think whatever the mother dreams, the baby can see it as well when they're sleeping.

I'd agree if it were a near full term mother, then yes, the baby could possibly dream. But Alice was thin and wearing tight jeans so that baby was still the size of a pea inside her. It wouldn't even have a brain yet to do any dreaming lol.

I know i'm overthinking it, but I think this concept would've worked better had she been a few months more pregnant. I still went with it after laughing though. :lol:


I interpreted this as Freddy showing Alice how he was conceived. He's there showing her what happened to Amanda and why he's so evil.

Ok that make sense. I don't know why I didn't think of that. But then my logical side rears it's head again....why would Freddy want her to know these things? Does he view her as more than just his victim now? Showing her how and why he became what he is indicates that he cares what she thinks of him which now makes him more "human".


We are to believe that's how Freddy dies this time. However, he always finds a way back. We learn this with each movie. Part 2 he came back using that kid as a vessel. Part 3 he came back using the last kids of Elm street. Part 4 he came back using Kristen's fears. Part 5 he comes back through Alice's baby. Part 6 you'll see how he comes back again. Part 6 is about Freddy's adult life. We're still not done learning about him.

I think part 6 is where we see when the parents torched him right? I know we see it in one of the films because I remember that scene years ago. I'll watch that one next Saturday.


I don't know if I like part 5 as much as part 3. I think 1, 3, and Freddy vs. Jason are the best of the Freddy series. I like em all, but those 3 are fun to watch again and again :) Even though these movies confuse the hell out of ya, I'm glad you're enjoying them :D

I like part 5 because it kept me on my toes and wondering what's going on. I like that because it keeps me interested in what's going on. That's why I say part 5 so far is the best imo. It kept my attention through the whole thing more than the others.

So this occurred while she was walking around out and about? She just slipped into the dream while she was awake? That means her body was still moving since she was already inside the diner and her co worker said she was 4 hours late....so she couldn't have been standing there in that same spot for 4 hours. This tells me she falls into dreams but can still function in reality. :confused:


I don't know about that one. Unless she was taken to the dream world and then came out of it like Freddy does.


Ok that make sense. I don't know why I didn't think of that. But then my logical side rears it's head again....why would Freddy want her to know these things? Does he view her as more than just his victim now? Showing her how and why he became what he is indicates that he cares what she thinks of him which now makes him more "human".

Or he is trying to make her vulnerable so she won't be as strong to fight him this time. He tried scaring her and that didn't work. Maybe he was using emotion to make her soft so he could kill her easily this time.


I think part 6 is where we see when the parents torched him right? I know we see it in one of the films because I remember that scene years ago. I'll watch that one next Saturday.

There's a scene like this in both part 6 and Freddy vs. Jason. In Freddy vs. Jason we actually see the parents throwing torches in Freddy's basement.


I like part 5 because it kept me on my toes and wondering what's going on. I like that because it keeps me interested in what's going on. That's why I say part 5 so far is the best imo. It kept my attention through the whole thing more than the others.

You may like part 6 better. It goes more in Freddy's life than any of the others. I haven't watched part 6 in awhile so it'll be a treat watching it in the morning to talk with you about it.

There's a scene like this in both part 6 and Freddy vs. Jason. In Freddy vs. Jason we actually see the parents throwing torches in Freddy's basement.

You may like part 6 better. It goes more in Freddy's life than any of the others. I haven't watched part 6 in awhile so it'll be a treat watching it in the morning to talk with you about it.


Part 6 was totally new for me and I thought I saw them all. Absolutely nothing was triggering my memory watching this one so I must have completely skipped over this one all these years. All the others I watched so far had me recalling scenes here and there, but this one....nothing.

I still liked 5 better. This one imo wasn't as good, and that lead girl who played Freddy's daughter was a terrible actress. She barely showed any emotion throughout the whole film and it was distracting. I think I would've enjoyed it more had a better actress played that part.

I liked more of Freddy's history being revealed. This was a film I know I never seen because I never knew Freddy killed his wife in front of his daughter....Hell, I never knew Freddy even HAD a daughter! :lol:

All these years I never knew this!! The only films left are "New Nightmare" and "Freddy vs Jason"...and I saw the Jason one but not New Nightmare. So I must have stopped watching the series altogether after part 5.

But learning he had a daughter and a wife was interesting. And seeing how evil he was as a grade school boy was not particularly fun...I don't like any kind of animal abuse, even if it's off camera. What he did to the poor little hamster was terrible. :(

The kills were inventive--especially with the poor kid with the hearing aid.

So the setting is 10 years from the last film and the whole town's kids have been murdered by Freddy. This means that the whole town is now aware of Freddy's continued supernatural existence? It wasn't clearly conveyed.

But when Roseanne and that God awful Tom Arnold appeared they seemed to show that they knew children weren't safe in the town when they saw the kids appear there. :confused:

I saw on the Wikipedia page the last 30 minutes were 3D in theaters. I could tell the parts that were 3D when I watched tonight, and i'm kind of glad I didn't see it back then because I never cared for 3D. I saw Friday the 13th 3D one in theaters and found it distracted me from the film.

So now the way to kill Freddy is to bring him into the real world. So that means this could've been done in part 2 had the girl just stuck a knife into his heart when he had her in the kitchen. Or anyone at the pool party just jumped him and beat him to death. :lol:

And in the end the three heads that flew out of him and entered him when he was being burned are the "Dream Demons" according to Wikipedia so this is what gave him his power?

So even if Freddy's now completely dead...the Dream Demons still exist and could theoretically start a whole new series I guess? This opened up more avenues with the franchise to have new serial killers after Freddy and I wonder why they never went with that? It seems like a good idea to keep the series going and refresh it with someone new.

I did peek at "New Nightmare" on Wikipedia, but not too much as I hate being spoiled. From the bits that I saw, it's a movie within a movie? I want to ask if Freddy comes back, but won't!!! So don't tell! :lol:

I know he comes back for Jason, but I like seeing how they dream up his return in each episode. I just hope that terrible actress who played his daughter isn't back in the next one---unless she took some major acting lessons. My God she was so terrible that I wondered how the hell she got the lead part in this. :lol:

Oh well....2 more installments left and then it's onto the Final Destinations. Though i'm debating whether or not to give the 2010 remake a try. I never saw it and now feeling curious. So I may see it before starting FD.

Part 6 was totally new for me and I thought I saw them all. Absolutely nothing was triggering my memory watching this one so I must have completely skipped over this one all these years. All the others I watched so far had me recalling scenes here and there, but this one....nothing.

If it wasn't this film you're thinking of with Freddy getting torched, maybe it was the beginning of Freddy vs. Jason you saw?


I still liked 5 better. This one imo wasn't as good, and that lead girl who played Freddy's daughter was a terrible actress. She barely showed any emotion throughout the whole film and it was distracting. I think I would've enjoyed it more had a better actress played that part.

Part 6 isn't one of my favs either, but it's alright. Rewatching it last night, I lost interest after Spencer was killed. The actress playing his daughter kept reminding me of Olivia from Law & Order SVU. She was playing the role of a tough detective than counselor.

I liked more of Freddy's history being revealed. This was a film I know I never seen because I never knew Freddy killed his wife in front of his daughter....Hell, I never knew Freddy even HAD a daughter! :lol:

This is why I like the Freddy movies over the Jason ones. With Jason, it's always the same in each movie. In the Freddy movies we learn about his birth, his childhood, his adult life, and how he became a dream demon. The Freddy movies keep evolving as they go on giving the viewer something new each time to learn about.

The kills were inventive--especially with the poor kid with the hearing aid.


I still could not watch that :lol: The Q-Tip scene just makes me cringe each time.

So the setting is 10 years from the last film and the whole town's kids have been murdered by Freddy. This means that the whole town is now aware of Freddy's continued supernatural existence? It wasn't clearly conveyed.

The town was becoming aware when Nancy was in the movies. She kept telling everyone only they wouldn't believe her. You'll see how this affects Springwood in Freddy vs. Jason.

But when Roseanne and that God awful Tom Arnold appeared they seemed to show that they knew children weren't safe in the town when they saw the kids appear there. :confused:

Did you see how they credited them during the credits? Mr. and Mrs. Tom Arnold :rolleyes: ohno: I don't understand why Roseanne didn't have her name on the credits. She's way bigger than Tom Arnold. I wonder now if this was Tom's idea to make a cameo and Roseanne went along with it giving all credit to him?

So now the way to kill Freddy is to bring him into the real world. So that means this could've been done in part 2 had the girl just stuck a knife into his heart when he had her in the kitchen. Or anyone at the pool party just jumped him and beat him to death. :lol:

But that wasn't just Freddy they'd be killing. They also would be killing Jesse. That was Jesse's body with Freddy's image taking over.

And in the end the three heads that flew out of him and entered him when he was being burned are the "Dream Demons" according to Wikipedia so this is what gave him his power?

Yep. There was a scene at the beginning of the movie where Freddy's daughter is being told about the Dream Demons from Doc.

So even if Freddy's now completely dead...the Dream Demons still exist and could theoretically start a whole new series I guess? This opened up more avenues with the franchise to have new serial killers after Freddy and I wonder why they never went with that? It seems like a good idea to keep the series going and refresh it with someone new.

I don't know if I would have watched it. The whole purpose of A Nightmare on Elm Street was Freddy. It would seem redundant to start all over with someone new. I'm glad Wes didn't do this. Freddy is very popular with horror fans, I don't think they would accept a new one. I wouldn't.

I did peek at "New Nightmare" on Wikipedia, but not too much as I hate being spoiled. From the bits that I saw, it's a movie within a movie? I want to ask if Freddy comes back, but won't!!! So don't tell! :lol:

All I'm going to say is this is my least favorite of the Freddy movies. I rarely watch this one during my Freddy marathon each Halloween.


I know he comes back for Jason, but I like seeing how they dream up his return in each episode. I just hope that terrible actress who played his daughter isn't back in the next one---unless she took some major acting lessons. My God she was so terrible that I wondered how the hell she got the lead part in this. :lol:

We never see his daughter again. She was only used for part 6. Also the actress is Billy Zane's sister. I'm sure she uses his name to get roles.

Oh well....2 more installments left and then it's onto the Final Destinations. Though i'm debating whether or not to give the 2010 remake a try. I never saw it and now feeling curious. So I may see it before starting FD.

Well if you ever wonder what it would be like to see someone else play Freddy, there's your chance. I think that's why I don't care for it. To me, Robert will always be Freddy and impossible to replace in that character.

If it wasn't this film you're thinking of with Freddy getting torched, maybe it was the beginning of Freddy vs. Jason you saw?

It had to be Freddy vs Jason then. Because this scene only showed Freddy burning when the Dream Demons came to him. What I remember in my mind is the parents chasing him and locking him in that big warehouse and torching him. The scene was longer too than what we see in Pt. 6.

Then again, memories usually play back different in our heads after a long time, so I bet the scene is different. But what I see in my head is the angry parents going after him.

Part 6 isn't one of my favs either, but it's alright. Rewatching it last night, I lost interest after Spencer was killed. The actress playing his daughter kept reminding me of Olivia from Law & Order SVU. She was playing the role of a tough detective than counselor.

She annoyed me to no end with her wooden acting and expressionless face.


This is why I like the Freddy movies over the Jason ones. With Jason, it's always the same in each movie. In the Freddy movies we learn about his birth, his childhood, his adult life, and how he became a dream demon. The Freddy movies keep evolving as they go on giving the viewer something new each time to learn about.

I think this was the best one in revealing his history. I liked seeing him out of makeup and how he was still evil as a regular human. I remember first seeing this actor in the TV movie "V" in the early 80's where he played a meek person and the complete opposite of Freddy. What a difference he is here. :lol:


I still could not watch that :lol: The Q-Tip scene just makes me cringe each time.

I actually laughed because the hearing aid on the other side popped off when the Q tip went through his head. :lol:

The town was becoming aware when Nancy was in the movies. She kept telling everyone only they wouldn't believe her. You'll see how this affects Springwood in Freddy vs. Jason.

You'd think after a while the whole town would come together to try and rid them of Freddy. But adults can't dream him right? It's only children and teens, but it would've been interesting to see a film where the whole town comes up with a plan to get him.

Like purposely have kids dream him and pull adults into their dream to pull him out into the real world and they all clobber him. :lol:


Did you see how they credited them during the credits? Mr. and Mrs. Tom Arnold :rolleyes: ohno: I don't understand why Roseanne didn't have her name on the credits. She's way bigger than Tom Arnold. I wonder now if this was Tom's idea to make a cameo and Roseanne went along with it giving all credit to him?

I remember this time in the early 90's and Roseanne was immensely popular and everywhere. And when she married that creep Arnold, almost everyone speculated (rightly so imo) that he was just riding her coattails and using her for her money & fame.

And when he married her he was viewed as "Mr. Roseanne" because everyone knew who wore the pants in that marriage so having "Mrs. Tom Arnold" was most likely Roseanne's idea imo to try and change people's perception of him being a money grubbing gold digger. I bet anything she wanted that title in the film for his benefit.

I always thought he was a coked up leech (and still do) but Roseanne was really in love with him and wound up being taken advantage of by him. Heck, she even gave him his own sitcom which no one watched lol. I cheered when she finally dumped him. The man has always made my skin crawl. puke::barf:


But that wasn't just Freddy they'd be killing. They also would be killing Jesse. That was Jesse's body with Freddy's image taking over.

That's right. I've already forgotten about that. :lol:


I don't know if I would have watched it. The whole purpose of A Nightmare on Elm Street was Freddy. It would seem redundant to start all over with someone new. I'm glad Wes didn't do this. Freddy is very popular with horror fans, I don't think they would accept a new one. I wouldn't.

After a while Freddy gets a little stale for me. I've mentioned this before how his joking when he kills detracts from his being scary. I think turning it into an anthology where the Dream Demons enter different people who are out for revenge is an interesting concept.

I think the whole franchise can be restarted again if they went that route now.


All I'm going to say is this is my least favorite of the Freddy movies. I rarely watch this one during my Freddy marathon each Halloween.

I see that one next week and really curious what it's about after the little that I read. If it's a movie within a movie, it sounds interesting....didn't Scream do that concept in one of their installments? I have a vague memory of that. :confused:

We never see his daughter again. She was only used for part 6. Also the actress is Billy Zane's sister. I'm sure she uses his name to get roles.

Thank God is all I have to say. She ruined part 6 for me I felt her acting was that bad. And Billy Zane is no Oscar caliber performer either so it apparently runs in the family. :lol:

Well if you ever wonder what it would be like to see someone else play Freddy, there's your chance. I think that's why I don't care for it. To me, Robert will always be Freddy and impossible to replace in that character.

I think i'll watch it to satisfy my curiosity. I read that he's not much of a joker in the reboot and I may actually enjoy it more in that aspect.

Fun fact about Heather Langenkamp:

She was in the music video for Sleeping Bag by ZZ Top with John Dye.

It had to be Freddy vs Jason then. Because this scene only showed Freddy burning when the Dream Demons came to him. What I remember in my mind is the parents chasing him and locking him in that big warehouse and torching him. The scene was longer too than what we see in Pt. 6.

Then again, memories usually play back different in our heads after a long time, so I bet the scene is different. But what I see in my head is the angry parents going after him.

I don’t have time to respond to all but I want to let you know the scene you described is from the new Freddy movie 10 years ago. That’s the only Freddy movie that shows him being chased by the parents in a flashback. If you rewatch it, I’m curious to know your opinions on the different style Jackie brought to Freddy. There are scenes in the film where new Freddy tries to have the one liners like original Freddy. I don’t think he pulled it off that well but that’s just my opinion.

I don’t have time to respond to all but I want to let you know the scene you described is from the new Freddy movie 10 years ago. That’s the only Freddy movie that shows him being chased by the parents in a flashback. If you rewatch it, I’m curious to know your opinions on the different style Jackie brought to Freddy. There are scenes in the film where new Freddy tries to have the one liners like original Freddy. I don’t think he pulled it off that well but that’s just my opinion.

If that's where it's from then I did see the remake and just don't remember it except for that one scene. So i'm definitely going to buy it once I finish Freddy vs Jason and watch it again.

I honestly can't recall anything about it so I too am curious how i'll feel with a new person playing Freddy. If I can't remember any of it though, it can't be too good. :lol:

I think this was the best one in revealing his history. I liked seeing him out of makeup and how he was still evil as a regular human. I remember first seeing this actor in the TV movie "V" in the early 80's where he played a meek person and the complete opposite of Freddy. What a difference he is here. :lol:

I like him best as a villain. He plays in the remake of 2001 Maniacs and does a good job. I've seen other horror films of his but Freddy tops them all. That was a hard role for him to break away from to not be stereotype all the time.


I actually laughed because the hearing aid on the other side popped off when the Q tip went through his head. :lol:

Yeah and that just creeps me out :lol:


You'd think after a while the whole town would come together to try and rid them of Freddy. But adults can't dream him right? It's only children and teens, but it would've been interesting to see a film where the whole town comes up with a plan to get him.

Like purposely have kids dream him and pull adults into their dream to pull him out into the real world and they all clobber him. :lol:

Well, technically no adults can't dream Freddy unless the kid pulls them into the dream. Kristen did that to Nancy in part 3. It's always teenagers Freddy attacks in their dreams.


I remember this time in the early 90's and Roseanne was immensely popular and everywhere. And when she married that creep Arnold, almost everyone speculated (rightly so imo) that he was just riding her coattails and using her for her money & fame.

And when he married her he was viewed as "Mr. Roseanne" because everyone knew who wore the pants in that marriage so having "Mrs. Tom Arnold" was most likely Roseanne's idea imo to try and change people's perception of him being a money grubbing gold digger. I bet anything she wanted that title in the film for his benefit.

I always thought he was a coked up leech (and still do) but Roseanne was really in love with him and wound up being taken advantage of by him. Heck, she even gave him his own sitcom which no one watched lol. I cheered when she finally dumped him. The man has always made my skin crawl. puke::barf:

Well it was rumored that Lecy wanted off the show in the early 90's because of Tom making inappropriate comments to her. He always gave off that scuzzy persona. I don't care for him. It did surprise me that Roseanne allowed herself to be billed as "Mrs. Tom Arnold" in the credits for this movie ohno:


That's right. I've already forgotten about that. :lol:

Part 2 is easy to forget about because nothing major really happened in that one. 1, 3 - 6 are all connected to the origins of Freddy. That's why I think part 2 could never been made and it wouldn't had made a difference in the series. It's like a filler movie before we get to the real story of Freddy.


After a while Freddy gets a little stale for me. I've mentioned this before how his joking when he kills detracts from his being scary. I think turning it into an anthology where the Dream Demons enter different people who are out for revenge is an interesting concept.

I think the whole franchise can be restarted again if they went that route now.

Hmm, well watch Jackie's portrayal of Freddy and let me know if you still think this series can be done with a new Freddy :lol: :p


I see that one next week and really curious what it's about after the little that I read. If it's a movie within a movie, it sounds interesting....didn't Scream do that concept in one of their installments? I have a vague memory of that. :confused:

Oh the Scream series is iconic. It was never silly like Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Scream 3 does do something similar except, ugh I can't say because it's spoilers damn it :lol: I'll just say Scream 3 is better than New Nightmare IMO.

I think i'll watch it to satisfy my curiosity. I read that he's not much of a joker in the reboot and I may actually enjoy it more in that aspect.

I just watched this one recently and have a list of things to criticize about :lol: When you watch it, I'll be pointing out a lot of things that hopefully you caught through the film. It helps having seen 1 - 6 recently so I can see how different or how much the remake took from the original series to make the film.


If that's where it's from then I did see the remake and just don't remember it except for that one scene. So i'm definitely going to buy it once I finish Freddy vs Jason and watch it again.

I honestly can't recall anything about it so I too am curious how i'll feel with a new person playing Freddy. If I can't remember any of it though, it can't be too good. :lol:

The chase scene of Freddy from the parents is in the remake. One of the victims sees a flashback of Freddy running from the parents driving in their cars chasing him down a road to the warehouse. He goes inside locking himself in. He then has parents throwing items on fire through the windows burning Freddy.

My biggest gripe was the acting of Jackie in the remake. I didn't care for it. He tried to do a different take of the character to make it his own and it bombed. I thought it was interesting he said in an interview he was signed on for sequels but due to the negative response of the remake, all sequels were canceled. Unless Robert decides to play a golden oldie Freddy, we'll never see another new Freddy movie again.

Oh the Scream series is iconic. It was never silly like Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Scream 3 does do something similar except, ugh I can't say because it's spoilers damn it :lol: I'll just say Scream 3 is better than New Nightmare IMO.

I just watched this one recently and have a list of things to criticize about :lol: When you watch it, I'll be pointing out a lot of things that hopefully you caught through the film. It helps having seen 1 - 6 recently so I can see how different or how much the remake took from the original series to make the film.

I watched "New Nightmare" tonight and HATED it! It was so illogical, convoluted, confusing, and bizarre. I went in thinking they were filming a new Freddy film and he kills the people on the set. (Maybe I confused it with Scream because that was the plot there I think?)

Anyway, what played was a confusing mess of a movie. :confused::confused:

Why the hell have Heather Langencamp play herself when she basically wound up being Nancy the character in the end of the film anyway?! (And how the hell that happened I don't know.) It was all so bizarre. I would've liked to have just seen Nancy and her kid be stalked by Freddy instead of this mess.

For one...she was too quick to believe it was Freddy coming after her. Why on earth would she so easily accept the monster from a film she did a decade earlier was coming for her. When she mentioned mental illness in her family, that's where I thought the whole film was leading up to...that none of this was happening and she just lost her mind. :lol:

It also broke it's rule how Freddy had no powers in reality yet right in front of the nurses in the hospital they saw her being killed by him up on the ceiling. Maybe real Freddy could do it? :rolleyes:

Most of the film seemed to be endless foreshadowing of what was to come and it weighted the film down. For too long, nothing happened but Heather being scared and wondering if Freddy was coming for her.

And by the time she went after her son crossing the highway in one of the most absurd scenes in horror movie memory, I was done and just forced myself to watch to the end.

The only good scene I liked was in the hospital where the woman doctor was rightfully thinking this is some crazy actress who's delusionally living out her horror films lol. I really enjoyed how that scene played out because it was such a natural reaction to Heather's behavior.

Then when Nancy's grey streak suddenly appeared in her hair at the hospital...I couldn't figure out if this was real or a dream. It made no logical sense how the gray streak would just happen---did Heather morph into fictional Nancy?!

Which leads me to the whole Freddy thing---because the writer wrote the script about Freddy, it just brought him to life?! It's too bizarre for me to follow---and then in the end she picks up the script and says "It's just a story"...WTF?!??

So----it was all a dream? A story? It left too many questions and illogical holes in it. This isn't going to sound good, but I don't want to think too much when I watch my horror flicks.

Oh then there was the pointless Robert Englund who appeared to be going through the same thing as Heather when we saw him painting Freddy and those Dream Demons---yet they just dropped that whole thing and we never saw Englund again after that. So who knows what the hell was going on with him there.

It was all such a big fat mess--and hardly any kills either. Just the best friend and husband---and the rest of the damn film was spooky foreshadowing with Heather looking confused and scared wherever she went.

Which brings me to Heather Lagenkamp. I don't think she's a strong enough actress to carry a whole movie like this. She was good in part 1 and 3 because we got breaks from her with Freddy and other characters.

Heather was in almost every scene here and her lack of acting skills was amplified. She was just....blah, and i would've preferred that she had 4 or 5 friends that shared in the acting that had been Freddy victims, rather than her carrying the bulk of the film.

It was also the longest of the series clocking in at almost 2 hours which made it all the more difficult to trudge through. This is one movie I can say for sure I will not watch again. Once was enough!

Next week is Freddy vs Jason and I can't wait! I have the 4 film collection that the discs are 2 sided and I accidentally popped it in the wrong way and FvJ started playing---and it looked good.

And that very first scene showed the parents torching Freddy which I remembered so this is where that scene is. I popped it out quick because I wanted to see New Nightmare first---but now I wished I had just let it play and skipped New Nightmare altogether. :lol:

I watched "New Nightmare" tonight and HATED it! It was so illogical, convoluted, confusing, and bizarre. I went in thinking they were filming a new Freddy film and he kills the people on the set. (Maybe I confused it with Scream because that was the plot there I think?)

Scream does have the story in the background of part 2 where they make a movie on Sydney's life. Scream 3 does involve a plot where the killer kills people on the new movie of Sydney's life, but it isn't anywhere near as dumb as New Nightmare. I watched New Nightmare so it would be fresh in my head. So glad I was multitasking the whole hour and 52 minutes :lol:


Why the hell have Heather Langencamp play herself when she basically wound up being Nancy the character in the end of the film anyway?! (And how the hell that happened I don't know.) It was all so bizarre. I would've liked to have just seen Nancy and her kid be stalked by Freddy instead of this mess.

So I interrupted it as Wes's movie was coming to life. Heather tells that agent at New Line Cinema that Wes must be having the nightmares again. I took it that Freddy was his original nightmare and he came to life by using Wes's movie. It's dumb but that's how I took it.


It also broke it's rule how Freddy had no powers in reality yet right in front of the nurses in the hospital they saw her being killed by him up on the ceiling. Maybe real Freddy could do it? :rolleyes:

I don't think any of the Freddy rules apply here. This isn't an actually Freddy movie. It's Wes Craven's nightmare by coming to life using his movie script. The scene you're talking about, only Dillon could see Freddy. All the nurses saw was the babysitter. Remember before the babysitter died, Dillon said look behind her and she didn't see anything? I think the only way Freddy was able to do that was because Dillon was falling asleep from the drug the nurse gave him giving Freddy a chance to appear.


And by the time she went after her son crossing the highway in one of the most absurd scenes in horror movie memory, I was done and just forced myself to watch to the end.

Yeah I tuned out during the film. Not enough Freddy and too much Heather being over dramatic.

Then when Nancy's grey streak suddenly appeared in her hair at the hospital...I couldn't figure out if this was real or a dream. It made no logical sense how the gray streak would just happen---did Heather morph into fictional Nancy?!

Yes. Wes had Heather turn into Nancy in his movie script so that's why the gray streak came back AND on the right side this time unlike part 3 :lol:

Which leads me to the whole Freddy thing---because the writer wrote the script about Freddy, it just brought him to life?! It's too bizarre for me to follow---and then in the end she picks up the script and says "It's just a story"...WTF?!??

This is probably one of the dumbest scenes in the film. She didn't want Dillon having anything to do with the Freddy movies, yet she reads him Wes's script about Freddy? That was stupid.

So----it was all a dream? A story? It left too many questions and illogical holes in it. This isn't going to sound good, but I don't want to think too much when I watch my horror flicks.

I took it that it was real and it was Wes who created the situation by spreading his nightmare of Freddy onto Heather with the script. It was illogical and bizarre.

Oh then there was the pointless Robert Englund who appeared to be going through the same thing as Heather when we saw him painting Freddy and those Dream Demons---yet they just dropped that whole thing and we never saw Englund again after that. So who knows what the hell was going on with him there.

If Robert had been in the film more as himself, it probably would have been better. They were mostly making Heather the star and pimping her out in almost EVERY scene of the movie. I'm not a fan of Heather's acting. I would have preferred Robert being terrorized instead.


It was all such a big fat mess--and hardly any kills either. Just the best friend and husband---and the rest of the damn film was spooky foreshadowing with Heather looking confused and scared wherever she went.

Of all the Freddy films, this one is the worst. I don't think it's the lack of kills that ruin it. It's the lack of Freddy because he is the star of Nightmare on Elm Street. Without Freddy, it's not worth watching.

Which brings me to Heather Lagenkamp. I don't think she's a strong enough actress to carry a whole movie like this. She was good in part 1 and 3 because we got breaks from her with Freddy and other characters.

Well to be fair, she's playing Nancy in 1 and 3. She's better at playing a character than herself in a movie.

It was also the longest of the series clocking in at almost 2 hours which made it all the more difficult to trudge through. This is one movie I can say for sure I will not watch again. Once was enough!

Now you see why I skip it in my rewatch :lol: It has nothing to do with the Freddy series. It was just a movie to pimp out Heather on viewers.

Next week is Freddy vs Jason and I can't wait! I have the 4 film collection that the discs are 2 sided and I accidentally popped it in the wrong way and FvJ started playing---and it looked good.

And that very first scene showed the parents torching Freddy which I remembered so this is where that scene is. I popped it out quick because I wanted to see New Nightmare first---but now I wished I had just let it play and skipped New Nightmare altogether. :lol:

Freddy vs. Jason is a better ending for Freddy than New Nightmare. I'm glad we got that with Robert in the role. It would have sucked that the last Freddy movie was a film based on Heather ohno:

I'm glad you found the scene you're thinking of. He wasn't chased in that scene though. He was standing in a cabin / house where the parents threw torches in. In the remake, he is chased by the parents. He locks himself up in the warehouse where he was killed. Either way, both are better than New Nightmare so you'll enjoy these next two Freddy films :)

John Saxon, who played Nancy Thompson’s father, passed away. :(

https://bloody-disgusting.com/movie/3624993/rip-john-saxon-star-of-a-nightmare-on-elm-street-and-black-christmas/

Scream does have the story in the background of part 2 where they make a movie on Sydney's life. Scream 3 does involve a plot where the killer kills people on the new movie of Sydney's life, but it isn't anywhere near as dumb as New Nightmare. I watched New Nightmare so it would be fresh in my head. So glad I was multitasking the whole hour and 52 minutes :lol:


I wish New Nightmare had been more along the lines of that Scream 3 story. I guess the concept of the actress of a horror film being terrorized by the horror film's monster is good on paper, but terrible in execution.

Had they kept it in the fiction world and be Nancy instead of Heather, I think this would've worked much better.


So I interrupted it as Wes's movie was coming to life. Heather tells that agent at New Line Cinema that Wes must be having the nightmares again. I took it that Freddy was his original nightmare and he came to life by using Wes's movie. It's dumb but that's how I took it.


So when Wes originally created Nightmare it was from his own nightmares? If that's the case, then it gives a somewhat plausible reason for it to manifest into reality since it could have been real when he originally dreamed it. But I think they should have conveyed that better than they did because that flew right over my head.

To make that work, we needed to see scenes with Wes having his original dreams back in the 80's that birthed the films. It would've put everything into clearer contest for the viewer.


I don't think any of the Freddy rules apply here. This isn't an actually Freddy movie. It's Wes Craven's nightmare by coming to life using his movie script. The scene you're talking about, only Dillon could see Freddy. All the nurses saw was the babysitter. Remember before the babysitter died, Dillon said look behind her and she didn't see anything? I think the only way Freddy was able to do that was because Dillon was falling asleep from the drug the nurse gave him giving Freddy a chance to appear.


Yeah, but the nurses did see her up on the ceiling in mid air like a scene from the Exorcist lol. Perhaps they didn't actually see Freddy, but they saw the kill as it happened.
This happened to asthma girl in one of them where the whole class saw her, but it just looked like an asthma attack---but this was a woman up on the ceiling being hacked. I think at that point, the nurses would've believed Heather that Freddy came to life.


Yeah I tuned out during the film. Not enough Freddy and too much Heather being over dramatic.


This was another huge mistake....not enough Freddy and too much Heather. If she were a better actress with more personality or charisma, it would've helped, but this actress has neither imo. She's so blah and boring---I actually liked the best friend better and would've have liked to have her been the lead.

I see on her Wikipedia page she's done nothing but documentaries and short films since so this only reinforces to me she's a lousy actress. :lol:

Yes. Wes had Heather turn into Nancy in his movie script so that's why the gray streak came back AND on the right side this time unlike part 3 :lol:


It was a little clever to have her hair turn grey like the character---but it just followed absolutely no logic or reasoning at all. Had she been inside a dream and then it happened, I would've bought it. But to have it happen to her in real life just made things more confusing.

This is probably one of the dumbest scenes in the film. She didn't want Dillon having anything to do with the Freddy movies, yet she reads him Wes's script about Freddy? That was stupid.


And especially since they just apparently lived the whole script and was almost killed, why read it back to the kid as a story? They just freaking lived the horror and I doubt the kid would want to hear it all played back. :lol:


I took it that it was real and it was Wes who created the situation by spreading his nightmare of Freddy onto Heather with the script. It was illogical and bizarre.


They could've explained how this whole thing manifested from fiction to reality so we could understand and buy it. I think that's crucial to make the movie work. And seeing Wes in 1984 having his original dreams which caused him to create the original script would've been a perfect way to explain everything.


If Robert had been in the film more as himself, it probably would have been better. They were mostly making Heather the star and pimping her out in almost EVERY scene of the movie. I'm not a fan of Heather's acting. I would have preferred Robert being terrorized instead.


I agree it definitely should've been Robert being terrorized by Freddy. Oh how much better that would've been!


Of all the Freddy films, this one is the worst. I don't think it's the lack of kills that ruin it. It's the lack of Freddy because he is the star of Nightmare on Elm Street. Without Freddy, it's not worth watching.

I think it's a little of both. You can't have a horror film with just a couple of kills. Then it's just a suspense film. More Freddy and more kills would have saved this steaming pile.


Well to be fair, she's playing Nancy in 1 and 3. She's better at playing a character than herself in a movie.


I don't think it's just her playing a character. In New Nightmare she's in nearly every freaking scene. More co stars having their own scenes and breaking away from Heather would've been better. Having her in every scene only amplified her lack of acting skills imo. This is why I can take her much more in th eearlier films, because other actors are carrying the load with her. And it doesn't say much when an actress fails at playing herself. :lol:


Now you see why I skip it in my rewatch :lol: It has nothing to do with the Freddy series. It was just a movie to pimp out Heather on viewers.


Did viewers clamor for her or something? I get she's kinda the star of the Freddy films from the original, but she's definitely no Jamie Lee Curtis----not by a long shot. :lol:


Freddy vs. Jason is a better ending for Freddy than New Nightmare. I'm glad we got that with Robert in the role. It would have sucked that the last Freddy movie was a film based on Heather ohno:

I'm glad you found the scene you're thinking of. He wasn't chased in that scene though. He was standing in a cabin / house where the parents threw torches in. In the remake, he is chased by the parents. He locks himself up in the warehouse where he was killed. Either way, both are better than New Nightmare so you'll enjoy these next two Freddy films :)

I have this memory of him being chased by the parents so that means I had to have seen the remake because I can see it in my head. After Freddy vs Jason, i'll watch the remake just to see if i'm not dreaming up all that. :lol:

I haven't bought the Screams yet and really want to start those next, but I have all the Final Destinations, so will start those after the remake and then the Screams.

I wish New Nightmare had been more along the lines of that Scream 3 story. I guess the concept of the actress of a horror film being terrorized by the horror film's monster is good on paper, but terrible in execution.

Had they kept it in the fiction world and be Nancy instead of Heather, I think this would've worked much better.

I don't even understand what Wes's thought was when making this movie. It didn't click well at all. There was too much Heather and not enough Freddy. Heather's scenes weren't even terrorizing. She just kept acting like a victim which got stale after a few minutes.

You know what I don't understand about Heather being Nancy in the end? Nancy died in part 3 so how was Wes even going to bring Nancy back? Are we to believe part 3 never happened since Nancy was alive for Freddy at the end? :crazy:


So when Wes originally created Nightmare it was from his own nightmares? If that's the case, then it gives a somewhat plausible reason for it to manifest into reality since it could have been real when he originally dreamed it. But I think they should have conveyed that better than they did because that flew right over my head.

To make that work, we needed to see scenes with Wes having his original dreams back in the 80's that birthed the films. It would've put everything into clearer contest for the viewer.

That's what we were led to believe from the scene with Heather and the agent at New Line Cinema. She told the guy that Wes only created Freddy because of his nightmares in the beginning. She said he must be having the nightmares again since he's writing a new movie. I would have preferred more scenes with Wes over Heather because it would have helped the movie flow better. They spent too much time on Heather being a victim than explaining what was happening to make her the victim.


This was another huge mistake....not enough Freddy and too much Heather. If she were a better actress with more personality or charisma, it would've helped, but this actress has neither imo. She's so blah and boring---I actually liked the best friend better and would've have liked to have her been the lead.

I see on her Wikipedia page she's done nothing but documentaries and short films since so this only reinforces to me she's a lousy actress. :lol:

I've only seen Heather in the Freddy movies. Either she didn't try hard enough to get herself out there or she was rejected each time because she doesn't have the skills of an actress.



It was a little clever to have her hair turn grey like the character---but it just followed absolutely no logic or reasoning at all. Had she been inside a dream and then it happened, I would've bought it. But to have it happen to her in real life just made things more confusing.

Well Nancy was turning into Nancy from part 1. I just don't understand where this Freddy was going to take place in Nancy's life. Nancy died in part 3 so was this to take place before part 3? This movie was so confusing I don't understand it. Like why didn't Heather bring up to the New Line Cinema agent that Nancy died in part 3? How was Nancy even going to be back for Freddy?


They could've explained how this whole thing manifested from fiction to reality so we could understand and buy it. I think that's crucial to make the movie work. And seeing Wes in 1984 having his original dreams which caused him to create the original script would've been a perfect way to explain everything.

There's so many things they could have done to make this movie better but they didn't. The whole purpose was for Heather to try to jump start her career IMO. Since this movie was more about her than the premise of Freddy, it's obvious the film was only created to help Heather get recognize again.


I agree it definitely should've been Robert being terrorized by Freddy. Oh how much better that would've been!

I thought of that idea when the scene with Robert painting Freddy came on. It would have made more sense that he was traumatize since he played in so many gory scenes killing teenagers. They dropped the ball on that one.


Did viewers clamor for her or something? I get she's kinda the star of the Freddy films from the original, but she's definitely no Jamie Lee Curtis----not by a long shot. :lol:

From what I read, New Nightmare is the lowest grossing film of the franchise. Not a lot of people were interested in seeing a film based on Heather. They wanted their Freddy fix and that didn't happen.


I have this memory of him being chased by the parents so that means I had to have seen the remake because I can see it in my head. After Freddy vs Jason, i'll watch the remake just to see if i'm not dreaming up all that. :lol:

It's not at the beginning of the film. It's in the middle where the scene takes place. I have a list of things to criticize the remake over so I can't wait until you see it. I also noticed a lot of references to the original Freddy that I'm curious if you pick up on.


I haven't bought the Screams yet and really want to start those next, but I have all the Final Destinations, so will start those after the remake and then the Screams.

The Scream movies should be cheap to buy. They even have those 4 films in one set that isn't too much. Scream is like Freddy for me. It's fun watching. With Scream, I can watch them over and over and not get sick of it. Scream has the strong core cast that kept returning each film. That's one advantage over the Freddy movies. It was just Robert returning and as you saw in some films, they place him with the lousiest costars. Scream also has that mystery of who's behind the mask. Some of the reveals are so crazy when it plays out. As for Final Destination, I like the ending to that franchise. There were so many clues in 5 that I didn't pay attention to. It wrapped up pretty well IMO. That's a franchise I don't mind watching over again.

The only part I remembered from when I originally saw it was when the girl got killed with all the drug needles lolIts a strange movie...... No oen dies in it,its all a dream!! (In the first one @ least no one died)

It's not at the beginning of the film. It's in the middle where the scene takes place. I have a list of things to criticize the remake over so I can't wait until you see it. I also noticed a lot of references to the original Freddy that I'm curious if you pick up on.

I'm going to watch the remake next week. I don't have the dvd, but I finally got a smart TV with built in Roku so I can just rent it off Amazon for $2.99. I had to have seen it before since I remember that scene with Freddy being chased by the parents.


The Scream movies should be cheap to buy. They even have those 4 films in one set that isn't too much. Scream is like Freddy for me. It's fun watching. With Scream, I can watch them over and over and not get sick of it. Scream has the strong core cast that kept returning each film. That's one advantage over the Freddy movies. It was just Robert returning and as you saw in some films, they place him with the lousiest costars. Scream also has that mystery of who's behind the mask. Some of the reveals are so crazy when it plays out. As for Final Destination, I like the ending to that franchise. There were so many clues in 5 that I didn't pay attention to. It wrapped up pretty well IMO. That's a franchise I don't mind watching over again.

For Scream, i'll buy each film separately because I can get them used for $5 bucks each on Ebay whereas the 4 pack dvd set is selling for $50 bucks or more which is ridiculous. I'm not going to shell out $50 for the same thing I can get for $20. I don't know why the 4 pk of that is so expensive when the Final Destination was just $9.99 at Walmart brand new...and you get 5 films over Scream's 4. I guess Scream is the more popular series?

Heck, I just checked Walmart website and they have the whole Saw series for just $9.99---and that's 7 films you're getting! I remember stopping halfway through the series because it was getting too dark, but for that low price I may get that now and give it a try after I finish the others.

Watched Freddy vs. Jason tonight and wow---I know I saw it when it was out on dvd but didn't remember any of it when watching it again tonight. But I really enjoyed it more than any of the Freddy films before it.

The story was tight and the suspense stayed high from beginning to end which I didn't feel watching most of the previous installments, so this is definitely the best of the bunch for me. I was completely riveted from start to finish.

The only tiny nitpick I have is how the one girl figured out the whole Freddy vs. Jason story within 2 minutes sitting at the table lol. It was unrealistic since she pretty much never heard of either Freddy or Jason prior to this yet she was able to profile the both of them to a T and figure out what was going on in a few minutes. It was so dumb how she put it all together so quickly.

But the film was so good I can overlook it. I like how they realistically got Jason & Freddy together. Since they're both in Hell it makes sense that he'd use Jason to draw in the victims while he makes them remember him and gains his strength so he could return.

And it was a treat to see Jason's crazed mother return to bring him back to life. (I'm not quite sure how Freddy managed to do it though since they're both in Hell and Freddy couldn't be capable of bringing Jason to life, but I went with it because it was great to see that crazy Mother again.)

It all played out in a logical way and I liked how all the adults in town knew about Freddy and went through painstaking efforts to keep his existence erased from the kids living in the town so he couldn't come back.

And when the two got together, their fight scenes were entertaining. I loved how Freddy injected Jason with tranquilizers to make him sleep so he can enter his Nightmare world where he can abuse him.

And later on it was Jason's turn to get Freddy when the girl pulled him into the real world and he was powerless. All of it was pretty suspenseful and loads of fun to watch. It's strange though how I remembered absolutely NONE of this when I know for a fact I seen it. 2003 wasn't THAT long ago. :lol:

The kills were all fun too and I loved when Jason massacred the party kids in the cornfield. And the final battle in the end was very satisfying. You know i'm partial to Jason over Freddy, so I was happy to see him walk out of the lake at the very end holding Freddy's severed head and him winning the battle. :clap:

But Freddy's wink did imply it wasn't going to stay that way. :lol:

And I even didn't see the twist coming about what happened between the girl's Dad and Mom. (I won't say more for those who don't want to be spoiled.) But it did catch me off guard and I love when that happens.

This is definitely one i'd watch over again from the series and glad I have it on dvd. And I never knew until tonight the guy playing Will is John Ritter's son...he was pretty good, and so was the lead girl as well. She sure made up for the bore that was Heather Lagencamp in the previous film. :lol:

Watched Freddy vs. Jason tonight and wow---I know I saw it when it was out on dvd but didn't remember any of it when watching it again tonight. But I really enjoyed it more than any of the Freddy films before it.

This is definitely one of the best Freddy films. Robert picked a good one to end the role on because it's hard to top something like this for future movies with Freddy. He was scarier in this film and kicking Jason's butt. This film proved Freddy is the ultimate horror movie villain.

The only tiny nitpick I have is how the one girl figured out the whole Freddy vs. Jason story within 2 minutes sitting at the table lol. It was unrealistic since she pretty much never heard of either Freddy or Jason prior to this yet she was able to profile the both of them to a T and figure out what was going on in a few minutes. It was so dumb how she put it all together so quickly.

The Scream series and I Know What You Did Last Summer probably had a lot to do with Lori figuring it out right away. Those two franchises turned the stereotype of female heroine's around. Not to mention the affect Buffy had on culture back then too with girl power. Women were portrayed smarter in horror films starting with the 90's compared to the dumb sex objects like the Jason movies in the 80's.


And when the two got together, their fight scenes were entertaining. I loved how Freddy injected Jason with tranquilizers to make him sleep so he can enter his Nightmare world where he can abuse him.

And later on it was Jason's turn to get Freddy when the girl pulled him into the real world and he was powerless. All of it was pretty suspenseful and loads of fun to watch. It's strange though how I remembered absolutely NONE of this when I know for a fact I seen it. 2003 wasn't THAT long ago. :lol:

The kills were all fun too and I loved when Jason massacred the party kids in the cornfield. And the final battle in the end was very satisfying. You know i'm partial to Jason over Freddy, so I was happy to see him walk out of the lake at the very end holding Freddy's severed head and him winning the battle. :clap:

See I think if those damn kids weren't there, Freddy would have killed Jason. Freddy was winning every battle with Jason until Lori and Will helped Jason by distracting Freddy and setting Freddy on fire. This is one aspect I love about the movie is that it really shows how powerful Freddy is because even when Jason walks out of the water with Freddy's head, Freddy winks showing he is still alive and going to take care of Jason without any interruptions this time. At least that's how I took it :lol: :D I'm more partial to Freddy than Jason because the Jason movies are all about nudity, sex, and the same boring kills over and over again.


And I even didn't see the twist coming about what happened between the girl's Dad and Mom. (I won't say more for those who don't want to be spoiled.) But it did catch me off guard and I love when that happens.

That's Freddy for you. The movies with Freddy always add new aspects and twists to help keep viewers entertained.


This is definitely one i'd watch over again from the series and glad I have it on dvd. And I never knew until tonight the guy playing Will is John Ritter's son...he was pretty good, and so was the lead girl as well. She sure made up for the bore that was Heather Lagencamp in the previous film. :lol:

He's a good actor. He had just landed a role on Joan of Arcadia when Freddy vs. Jason came out. He looks a lot like his dad. I'm glad he went into show business because he's not a bad actor at all. As for the actress who played Lori, she's ok. None of her other work interests me so this is the only movie I've seen her in.

This is definitely one of the best Freddy films. Robert picked a good one to end the role on because it's hard to top something like this for future movies with Freddy. He was scarier in this film and kicking Jason's butt. This film proved Freddy is the ultimate horror movie villain.

I liked that Freddy was scarier than the earlier films. This made him much more sinister and evil to me and I would've liked to have seen him this way from the start.
I love the killers like Jason and Michael Myers because of their silence. To me, that makes them much more scary and threatening to me. Freddy being silent would never have worked though but i'm glad they toned down his stand up one liners for this one. :lol:

The Scream series and I Know What You Did Last Summer probably had a lot to do with Lori figuring it out right away. Those two franchises turned the stereotype of female heroine's around. Not to mention the affect Buffy had on culture back then too with girl power. Women were portrayed smarter in horror films starting with the 90's compared to the dumb sex objects like the Jason movies in the 80's.

She was TOO smart though. After just a few minutes hearing about these killer's histories she had the whole concept of the film figured out. How the heck did she conclude that Freddy was using Jason to draw them to him and bring him back to life?
It was like she saw all the previous films and connected the dots. Only us viewers would have known something like that, but I get your point that the women were portrayed as being more proactive than just victims.

But then again, you did have that in a lot of the 80's slasher films with the Final Girl who always fought back. And even in the first Friday the 13th film, Amy Steel's character figured out why Jason was doing what he was doing, but she came to it in a logical and believable way.

The two lead girls in Freddy vs. Jason both figured out everything a little too quickly while sitting at a table for 5 minutes. I think it should've dawned on them a little more progressively throughout the film. But that's my only nitpick of it and doesn't detract from the whole movie.

I haven't seen the "Summer" films in ages. I only saw the first 2 and didn't bother with the 3rd because the first 2 were so similar to each other and I figured the 3rd would be the same. I'll throw that in my list to watch too.


See I think if those damn kids weren't there, Freddy would have killed Jason. Freddy was winning every battle with Jason until Lori and Will helped Jason by distracting Freddy and setting Freddy on fire. This is one aspect I love about the movie is that it really shows how powerful Freddy is because even when Jason walks out of the water with Freddy's head, Freddy winks showing he is still alive and going to take care of Jason without any interruptions this time. At least that's how I took it :lol: :D I'm more partial to Freddy than Jason because the Jason movies are all about nudity, sex, and the same boring kills over and over again.


I don't get how Freddy was able to nearly kill Jason since he had no powers while in reality, but was chopping him up pretty good before Lori and Will set the pier on fire. I agree, Freddy looked like he would've killed Jason, but you'd think it would be the other way around while Freddy was powerless in reality.


That's Freddy for you. The movies with Freddy always add new aspects and twists to help keep viewers entertained.

Is Robert Englund totally done with playing him? I see he's 73 so I guess chances are slim. I liked the way it all ended with Freddy vs Jason anyway, so maybe the franchise should stay finished.


He's a good actor. He had just landed a role on Joan of Arcadia when Freddy vs. Jason came out. He looks a lot like his dad. I'm glad he went into show business because he's not a bad actor at all. As for the actress who played Lori, she's ok. None of her other work interests me so this is the only movie I've seen her in.

I've looked over his TV and film work on his Wikipedia page and the only thing I seen him in is this Freddy movie. It's a shame he didn't do anything that made him more popular.

I liked that Freddy was scarier than the earlier films. This made him much more sinister and evil to me and I would've liked to have seen him this way from the start.
I love the killers like Jason and Michael Myers because of their silence. To me, that makes them much more scary and threatening to me. Freddy being silent would never have worked though but i'm glad they toned down his stand up one liners for this one. :lol:

I don't find anything scary about a silent killer. I find them boring because they're unimaginative and just killing for the heck of it. With Freddy and Ghostface, they carefully pick out who they're going to kill. It's a puzzle, mainly with Ghostface, on who will die next. With Freddy, it's always a question of how is he going to kill his prey where we already knew how Michael and Jason kill so there was less excitement with them for me.


She was TOO smart though. After just a few minutes hearing about these killer's histories she had the whole concept of the film figured out. How the heck did she conclude that Freddy was using Jason to draw them to him and bring him back to life?

Well she caught on at the beginning when the cops were saying "don't say his name". They were trying hard to keep Freddy forgotten. She was playing Nancy Drew from the start eavesdropping and putting theories together.


I haven't seen the "Summer" films in ages. I only saw the first 2 and didn't bother with the 3rd because the first 2 were so similar to each other and I figured the 3rd would be the same. I'll throw that in my list to watch too.

I did not care for the 3rd. It's no where near the same as the first 2. I'm going to stop talking about it in case you watch it. It's not my cup of tea though. Part 1 will always be my fav in the series.


I don't get how Freddy was able to nearly kill Jason since he had no powers while in reality, but was chopping him up pretty good before Lori and Will set the pier on fire. I agree, Freddy looked like he would've killed Jason, but you'd think it would be the other way around while Freddy was powerless in reality.

Freddy sliced off Jason't fingers. That's how he got the advantage in reality. Freddy wasn't sitting back letting Jason beat the crap out of him. He put up a huge, incredible fight. Freddy would have won that fight. Lori, being the vengeful girl she is though, couldn't let that happen :mumble: She grew sympathy for Jason. Did you catch that? You don't grow sympathy for a killer and help them escape their death ohno: Why are we calling her smart again? :lol:


Is Robert Englund totally done with playing him? I see he's 73 so I guess chances are slim. I liked the way it all ended with Freddy vs Jason anyway, so maybe the franchise should stay finished.

Robert said in an interview he's done playing Freddy because of his age and wishes the next person to play him well. I still miss his portrayal though in new Freddy material.

Is Robert Englund totally done with playing him? I see he's 73 so I guess chances are slim. I liked the way it all ended with Freddy vs Jason anyway, so maybe the franchise should stay finished.

He has said that he is done, but he did that Halloween episode of The Goldbergs last year. I think as long as it’s the right occasion for him that he will do it.

In a Bloody Disgusting interview he said he might play him one more time, but he couldn't do another 8.

Kevin Bacon says he would be up for playing the role.

Posted July 16:
https://read.ilovehalloween.net/robert-englund-wants-kevin-bacon-to-play-the-role-of-freddy-krueger

After seeing the 2010 remake tonight I can't say i'm looking forward to more to come. It held my attention, but was definitely lacking without Robert Englund as Freddy.

The guy who played Freddy here was terrible. I get he wanted to play him darker and more sinister, but he didn't have that Freddy essence and as much as I say I don't like how Englund plays Freddy with all the jokes and one liners---that's who this killer character is and without it, the heart of the movie is gone.

I also like Englund's makeup job much more than remake Freddy's, which looked like a bad Halloween mask. I just couldn't get into this Freddy at all and missed Englund. :(

As for the story, it loosely followed the original, but while watching I saw a huge missed opportunity that I wish was explored more.

While seeing how the parents banded together to kill Freddy at the warehouse, it dawned on me that the whole film really could've been shown from the parent's perspective more than the kids----I mean, we've seen the kid's perspectives countless times already in previous films---so why not from the parent's this time to switch things up?

Think about it---when the kid's start having their nightmares, the parents could have slowly started to realize what was happening and they have to band together once again to save their children from Freddy.

In this remake, when it showed Nancy's Mom call another parent on the phone about what was happening, I thought that's where the film was heading and it would've been so fun to see the parent's having the nightmares and fight Freddy to save their kids.

I think this would've went over well with audiences instead of watching the same story told again with the teens. Telling the same story but from the parent's perspective this time would've been a perfect way to reboot a stale series.

If there's another installment i'd like to see that---and about Kevin Bacon playing Freddy from the post above---I don't think i'd like that since I find Bacon a little too over the top as an actor and it would be 2 hours of him chewing the scenery. I hope he doesn't get the part if there's another one.

If it can't be Englund, then i'd hope for an unknown actor with similar body and facial features to him to play the role. But it's been a full decade since that remake, so I doubt another one is coming down the pike anytime soon.

Well, it's all finished and out of all of them, I pick Freddy vs. Jason as the best one...by a mile. I could watch that one over and over again I liked it that much.

Now it's on to the Final Destinations starting next Saturday and I can't wait!! :crazy::wave:

As for the story, it loosely followed the original, but while watching I saw a huge missed opportunity that I wish was explored more.

Did you notice how some of Freddy's one liners from the original films were used in the remake? For example when Nancy is running down the hallway and falls in a puddle of blood, Freddy says, "How's this for a wet dream?" That's what Freddy said in part 4 to the guy he drowned in the water bed. A lot of this remake was already shown in the original movies. The deaths were similar, the dialogue was the same, and the plot was similar. They added in Freddy was a child molester to make it a little different, but overall it lacked originality. This is why I don't watch the remake like the original films in my rewatch. They should have made it a completely different story like My Bloody Valentine and Black Christmas did when they were remade around that time. I think I would have liked it better if they weren't trying so hard to copy Robert's version of Freddy and just redoing the exact same story from part 1.


While seeing how the parents banded together to kill Freddy at the warehouse, it dawned on me that the whole film really could've been shown from the parent's perspective more than the kids----I mean, we've seen the kid's perspectives countless times already in previous films---so why not from the parent's this time to switch things up?

Think about it---when the kid's start having their nightmares, the parents could have slowly started to realize what was happening and they have to band together once again to save their children from Freddy.

In this remake, when it showed Nancy's Mom call another parent on the phone about what was happening, I thought that's where the film was heading and it would've been so fun to see the parent's having the nightmares and fight Freddy to save their kids.

I think this would've went over well with audiences instead of watching the same story told again with the teens. Telling the same story but from the parent's perspective this time would've been a perfect way to reboot a stale series.

I would have preferred this over what they made. It needed to be different instead of the same movie from part 1 in the 80's. Freddy targeting the parents would have been a great spin with the kids saving them. Or heck even the parents going into the dreams to save the kids would have been better. Something just to make it its own Freddy instead of a poor copy of the films already made.


If there's another installment i'd like to see that---and about Kevin Bacon playing Freddy from the post above---I don't think i'd like that since I find Bacon a little too over the top as an actor and it would be 2 hours of him chewing the scenery. I hope he doesn't get the part if there's another one.

If it can't be Englund, then i'd hope for an unknown actor with similar body and facial features to him to play the role. But it's been a full decade since that remake, so I doubt another one is coming down the pike anytime soon.


I can't see any actor playing Freddy the way Robert did though. Robert made Freddy his own creation on screen. When Jackie played Freddy in the remake, he looked bored to play the part. He brought nothing to the character. It was like he wasn't enjoying it the way Robert did. Robert proved you got to have that spark to play an eccentric character like Freddy. Freddy is sadistic and erratic. He can't be like Jackie's Freddy who just stood around saying in a low voice, "I'm gonna kill you" while waving his fingers that have knives on them around trying to scare someone. It's not scary. It's not entertaining. All it did was had viewers asking, "is it over yet?" ohno: I'm fine if there's no more Freddy movies since Robert is done playing the part.


Now it's on to the Final Destinations starting next Saturday and I can't wait!! :crazy::wave:


I can't believe you're done with the Freddy movies. This actually went by fast. You'll be onto the Scream movies in no time with the fast pace time is going :wave: I'm looking forward to your thoughts on part 4 of Final Destination. That's my least favorite in the franchise.

Forgot to quote so fixed it below. :bash::bash::bash::bash::bash::bash:

Did you notice how some of Freddy's one liners from the original films were used in the remake? For example when Nancy is running down the hallway and falls in a puddle of blood, Freddy says, "How's this for a wet dream?" That's what Freddy said in part 4 to the guy he drowned in the water bed. A lot of this remake was already shown in the original movies. The deaths were similar, the dialogue was the same, and the plot was similar. They added in Freddy was a child molester to make it a little different, but overall it lacked originality. This is why I don't watch the remake like the original films in my rewatch. They should have made it a completely different story like My Bloody Valentine and Black Christmas did when they were remade around that time. I think I would have liked it better if they weren't trying so hard to copy Robert's version of Freddy and just redoing the exact same story from part 1.

I agree---a different spin was desperately needed instead of what it was because we all knew where it was going and what would happen. Why remake something if there's not going to be a different angle involved?
Making Freddy a child molester was weak imo. Him being a child killer was scary enough--to veer into molesting territory was unneeded.

When remake Freddy said that "wet dream" line, I didn't recall it from the previous film, but I did take note that it was late into the film until we got a joke out of him and to me it fell flat with this Freddy. He was boring and the whole time I missed real Freddy.


I would have preferred this over what they made. It needed to be different instead of the same movie from part 1 in the 80's. Freddy targeting the parents would have been a great spin with the kids saving them. Or heck even the parents going into the dreams to save the kids would have been better. Something just to make it its own Freddy instead of a poor copy of the films already made.

That would've been a great way to reboot the series from a whole other perspective and given it new life. How many times can you watch teens try to stay awake and be killed by Freddy? After 8 films it has to get boring.

Switching things to the parent's perspective, since after all it was them who killed Freddy, would've been fantastic imo. Seeing teens try to save themselves is one thing, but parents fighting to save the lives of their children against a monster adds more tension.

I think a story like that could have only been done for the remake of the first installment so they missed the boat on that one. Doing it in part 2 wouldn't make much sense unless it's a whole separate story and not a sequel.


I can't see any actor playing Freddy the way Robert did though. Robert made Freddy his own creation on screen. When Jackie played Freddy in the remake, he looked bored to play the part. He brought nothing to the character. It was like he wasn't enjoying it the way Robert did. Robert proved you got to have that spark to play an eccentric character like Freddy. Freddy is sadistic and erratic. He can't be like Jackie's Freddy who just stood around saying in a low voice, "I'm gonna kill you" while waving his fingers that have knives on them around trying to scare someone. It's not scary. It's not entertaining. All it did was had viewers asking, "is it over yet?" ohno: I'm fine if there's no more Freddy movies since Robert is done playing the part.

I really couldn't believe this actor was the final choice to play him and they didn't see what a bore he was in test screens. What I hated most was the way his mask looked. It was nothing like Freddy and looked so fake that it distracted me.
Englund's Freddy mask was much better and when he played him, you saw his face more animated---this remake Freddy wasn't nearly as animated in comparison. He looked like his face was frozen inside that mask. :lol:



I can't believe you're done with the Freddy movies. This actually went by fast. You'll be onto the Scream movies in no time with the fast pace time is going :wave: I'm looking forward to your thoughts on part 4 of Final Destination. That's my least favorite in the franchise.

This is why I like to only watch one each Saturday evening. I don't want to zoom through them all too quickly and the days really do fly by---there are times I say to myself "It's Saturday already?!" :eek:

I haven't seen the Final Destinations in years so forgot so much of it. I think part 4 was the raceway one? All I remember of that is when the wheel came off the car and flew into someone's head in the stands I think. :lol:

Other than that, I have no idea how the story for that installment went.

So next i'll do the Final Destinations, Scream, Saw, I Know What You Did Last Summer, and also Candyman. (I love the first one and I just read a sequel to that is coming this year.)

All that should take me through the rest of the year and probably into the next. :crazy::wave:

I'm a fan of the Elm Street franchise, saw them all during their first run theatrical releases. Even the silly sequels like part 6 are never boring.

I love part 2, it kept the dark tone of the original before Freddy became jokey, and features some excellent make up effects by Marc Shostrom

There's an excellent documentary on the franchise titled Never Sleep Again, well worth checking out.

I checked out that documentary and now I'm on Scream Queen! My Nightmare on Elm Street. Have you seen that one?

I cannot believe until these documentaries that I never picked up on the gay subtext in part 2. A lot of it is stereotype based off how narrow minded people see gays though. Like one thing they went over was Jesse leaving his girlfriend after kissing her to go sleep in a room with his best man friend. Seriously? :rolleyes: People create things that don't fit in the way they want it and it's ridiculous.

As a gay man, I never saw the gay subtext in part 2. I always look at it as a new perspective on Freddy trying to come back to life by using Jesse as his vessel. I see the Freddy movies on the character of Freddy since that's the main premise in every single movie. However, people want to say this is gay or that is gay. Critics and haters of part 2 bash Mark's portrayal calling him every name in the book. It's sad he used this as his reason to call it quits for acting. I didn't really care for his acting in this film, but I'm sure he would have been good in other work. Instead of getting hurt for how Chaskin wrote the movie, he should have shunned it off and moved onto other work. He had some famous friends in Hollywood so he had the connections.

I am curious now though. Is Mark the only male scream queen? And why are some calling him a scream queen when he only did one horror movie? Jamie Lee Curtis, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Neve Campbell, and Lin Shaye, they did tons of horror films. They're actual scream queens. A person who does one scary flick and call it quits, isn't.