“The first was the best."
Phew. The franchise doesn't end with a whimper after all, but with a typically clever and well-directed instalment from the esteemed Mr Craven himself. This last film redeems the whole thing somewhat. Still, it's far from perfect in that it's somewhat slow and there's not enough Freddy screen time.
It’s clever, though; the franchise so far has just been a series of movies and Wes Craven, various actors and even producers appear as themselves. There’s lot of wry commentary on the tiresome idea of horror movies having a bad effect on society (yawn) and a lot of fourth wall-breaking fun- the ending, with Heather reading the script of the very film she’s in to her son, is perfect and, what’s more, believable. The concept is a good one- an Evil From The Dawn Of Time draws strength from monsters in scary stories and this time it’s taken on the form of Freddie from it’s new favourite horrror franchise. It’s a superb idea and very well realised, although the threat never quite feels like Freddy. In fact, much of the film evokes cinematic horror more widely- especially, in the excellent scenes with little Dylan, The Exorcist. And it’s clever to contrast the new “Freddy” make-up with Robert Englund wearing his old costume for the fans.
It’s very well done. It’s very witty. Stylistically, at times it feels very much like the precursor to Scream that it clearly is. But I can’t help feeling that it takes too long for things to start happening, Freddy doesn’t get enough screen time and, well, Freddy isn’t really Freddy, great though the effects are in the final showdown scene. This is an interesting case of a great concept, very well made, which perhaps suffers from not satisfying our expectations of the sort of film it’s supppsed to be.
And that, folks, is the end of Nightmare on Elm Street for a while. I have another franchise to devour before I get to Freddy vs. Jason, and I’ll be watching other stuff in-between. So many other horror franchises, too...
Welcome to my blog! I do reviews of Doctor Who from 1963 to present, plus spin-offs. As well as this I do non-Doctor Who related reviews of The Prisoner, The Walking Dead, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Dollhouse, Blake's 7, The Crown, Marvel's Agents of SHIELD, Sherlock, Firefly, Batman and rather a lot more. There also be reviews of more than 600 films and counting. Oh, and whatever I happen to be reading, or listening to. And Marvel comics in order from 1961 onwards.
Showing posts with label Heather Langenkamp. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Heather Langenkamp. Show all posts
Sunday, 29 July 2018
Saturday, 17 February 2018
A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)
"The bastard son of a hundred maniacs."
Well then. You can tell from the staggering number of years since I blogged the second film in this series that, as I said at the time, I was less than enthused by. I'm now far less likely to wait so long until the next one. This was bloody good.
We get lots of splendid visual horror from the start, well directed and making you jump, and this continues all the way through. But what really makes the film work is a solid plot based around a mental institution and fear of sleep and, in a film where Freddy Krueger is ever-present but appears surprisingly little- a successful formula- but the only disappointment here is that nasty Dr Simms doesn't die. And likeable characters do.
So what are my highlights? A very young Patricia Arquette? An early appearance by a young Laurence Fishburne? A rare Hollywood example of D&D being played? The delightfully '80s metal soundtrack by Dokken? The skeleton of Freddy Krueger resisting burial by means of stop motion? Probably the latter, but there are many. And the plot is actually quite gripping, and as twisty-turny as it is suspenseful.
Fellow Doctor Who fans: I believe that this is the earliest Hollywood film credit of one Rachel Talalay...?
Well then. You can tell from the staggering number of years since I blogged the second film in this series that, as I said at the time, I was less than enthused by. I'm now far less likely to wait so long until the next one. This was bloody good.
We get lots of splendid visual horror from the start, well directed and making you jump, and this continues all the way through. But what really makes the film work is a solid plot based around a mental institution and fear of sleep and, in a film where Freddy Krueger is ever-present but appears surprisingly little- a successful formula- but the only disappointment here is that nasty Dr Simms doesn't die. And likeable characters do.
So what are my highlights? A very young Patricia Arquette? An early appearance by a young Laurence Fishburne? A rare Hollywood example of D&D being played? The delightfully '80s metal soundtrack by Dokken? The skeleton of Freddy Krueger resisting burial by means of stop motion? Probably the latter, but there are many. And the plot is actually quite gripping, and as twisty-turny as it is suspenseful.
Fellow Doctor Who fans: I believe that this is the earliest Hollywood film credit of one Rachel Talalay...?
Saturday, 16 February 2013
A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)
"Whatever you do, don't fall asleep!"
I'd never seen this film before. Yes, I know. It's bloody
good, though. It isn't exactly the most expensive film ever made, the dialogue
is a little ropey, and the obscure cast (including a very young Johnny Depp!)
are not that good. But the direction is inspired, the set pieces are amazing,
and it's so very, very, scary, even for someone like me who is far too
conscious that what I'm watching is a piece of artifice to be easily scared.
Plus, the whole style evokes an '80s video
by The Cult or Bauhaus or some such band, which is delightfully cool.
The music, too, is wonderfully of its time.
The children's rhyme which pervades the film is hugely
effective in building up Freddie. Robert Englund is superb. The whole concept
of a monster that gets you in your dreams if you fall asleep is inspired. There
are so many good things to say here. I don't know all that much about slashers
of this vintage, but I wonder how innovative it might possibly have been to mix
the slasher with the supernatural as this film does. The use of dreams just
makes everything so, so much scarier. And the bath scene... brrr!
Of course, we start out with some hoary old tropes: four
teens are in a house, ready to be picked off one by one. But the film is
cleverer than that, and has a lot of fun with them. I couldn't help reflecting,
though, that the plot sort of revolves all around the only means of
communication being a house phone, which can be left off the hook by a stray
parent. I remember 1984, but this sort of thing makes it feel so very long ago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


