Reasons I think the remake is better than the original
Since Halloween is this month, I'm going to do three of these. One for Freddy, one for Michael and one for Jason. Yes, I've seen the original's so I think my reasons can be counted as vaild. Whether you agree with my opinion or not. Today is, Freddy.
The original A Nightmare on Elm Street came out in 1984, nearly 30 years ago. It's a classic and still one of the better horror films. While I don't particularly like the original. I appreciate and enjoy it for what it is, even if I haven't found horror movies to be scary since I was eight. I heard New Line and Platinum Dunes were rebooting the popular horror flick and I was excited about it because even though I appreciate it for what it is and enjoy it, I still don't like it. My mom however, wasn't particularly too excited because one of her favorite movies and franchises were getting the reboot treatment. I thought it looked good and she thought it looked okay. One of her biggest complaints is the biggest complaint of most people, it isn't Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger. I begged and pleaded for my mom to take me to see it opening day. She gave in. She was starting to fall asleep throughout the entire movie. I was engaged in it. She thinks it is okay. I for one still loved it and think I got my moneys worth, or my moms money I should say. Anyways, here are the reasons I think A Nightmare on Elm Street is better than the original.
Don't get me wrong, Robert Englund was great as Freddy Krueger. But, I think Jackie Earle Haley is better. For me, Robert Englund is way too comedic and not enough frightening and tense. People my age (I am sixteen) prefer Robert Englund over Jackie Earle Haley and it shows how much of an impact Robert made as Freddy, the only other person to be the character. I prefer Jackie as Freddy because he was scarier, he was tense, you could believe this man was a child molester. He brought that sort of rage and anger, you believed this was a very evil, sinister being. I won't touch on how he looked better because the original worked with what it had and it paid off.
I bet your asking yourself "how does tone make a film better?" Quite frankly, for me tone is a reason I felt this one was better. It all goes back to the fact that for a horror film, the original Nightmare film was lighthearted and comedic. This is alot more serious, more tense film. It brings a sense of freshness to the series, something that I felt it's lacked since the start.
The back story for Freddy in the original was good. The sequels wanted to give more to Freddy as a character and it just got too campy and bad for me to handle. This is why I felt the remakes back story is better and they added something to it to seperate themselves from the original, they try to make you think that Freddy wasn't a molester. They wanted the kids of Elm Street to think that Freddy was a innocent man that their parents murdered after their parents were keeping secrets from them. It was tense and a nutritious for the story.
I liked some of the nightmare scenes from the original and it's sequels because they were imaginitive and cool. Plus, there is no death better than Johnny Depp blood soup. So, why is the nightmares in the remake better? Well, they're simple and creepy. The classroom one is my favorite because it's the perfect example of how serious this movie is and creepy it can be.
This was a cool, smart, new direction for the Nightmare on Elm Street films. The kids staying up for too long that they start having nightmares, even when they're awake was an addition that is fresh and it's a new way for Freddy to torture and attack them. It was a cool way to give a fresh take on the famous hallway in the school scene. The best example I could give is the scene in the store with Nancy. It went back and forth between real life and the dream. It was a smart, tense, scary thing that was again, healthy for the story which their take on it is solid.
It's a remake. So, why touch on the story for a reason? It's better because it's not as simple as the original. It adds things like the micro-naps and the kids questioning if Freddy was an innocent man or not is what helps it become a solid story. It's fluid and it works. It's nothing new, there isn't anything particular about it. But, it's enough for it to work and it's solid.
Overall: Hate me all you want, call my reasons unvalid. These are reasons I feel the remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street is better than the original. The most impactful reason, Jackie Earle Haley's performance as Freddy Krueger. The second actor to play the character and is who I prefer. Love it or hate it, after New Line is done with making kiddie movies, they're going back to horror and coming out with a sequel to Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street (the most successful slasher remake) and personally, I can't wait.
Which do you prefer and why? Comment below and be respectful.
: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct
. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under "safe harbor" provisions and will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. For expeditious removal, contact us HERE