Well since I took the time and watched the original Nightmare on Elm Street movie, I decided in my own right to sit down and give my balls a tug furthermore go down the rabbit hole of Freddy Kruger's dream world. A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge? Takes some interesting ideas of possessing a kid or using him to kill his victims but as usual sequels go, they just end up shooting itself in the foot. And let’s be honest there really shouldn't be Freddy’s Revenge when it's all about new kids right. On a plus side to the sequels is that they're all consisting of 90 minutes so, in all fairness, is it not all bad right?
Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton) moves with his family into the home of the lone survivors from a series of attacks by dream stalker Freddy Kruger (Robert Englund). While suffering a series of nightmares, (quote, unquote) Freddy needs a host body to carry out his gruesome vendetta against the youth of Springwood, Ohio.
The funny fact behind Freddy's Revenge is that the studios of New Line Cinema didn't ask actor Robert Englund to return as Freddy at the start of production. And so, after a good two weeks of filming, Robert Shaye (who Green lit first Nightmare) realized how bad a mistake he made when hiring a stuntman to play Freddy, upon which Shaye quickly fired the stuntman, hired Englund and gave him a pay raise, to which at first didn't want to pay him during pre-production. For which let's be honest Shaye made an honest mistake but in Englund's defense he's got to pay bills since he's going to be playing Kruger for the rest of his life. I'll admit I had no interest in experiencing the rest of the Freddy films though I was convinced that slasher movies like these need to be experienced no matter how bad it is, and in all honesty this movie wasn't all bad. The film alone actually has some unique and creative ideas flowing through the story and this is without Craven coming back to write the sequel, and what I like most about the movie is simply they introduce a new set of teenagers set in the not to short and distant future after the events of the first film, and I like the fact that it's a different teen that's living in same house that Nancy use to live in and experience the same torment that she experienced. The other thing in what makes the film interesting as well as intriguing is that Freddy is trying to manipulate a teen into killing the victims or doing a sort of devil possession either way it brings interesting aspects of instead of Freddy normally killing his victims it's a teen being brain washed into believing he's killing these people and although yeah it gets confusing no doubt, but while watching the film it does have the intriguing ideas that makes the film interesting to watch especially when Robert Englund is returning to the role of Freddy although he claims in his memoir in 2009 that Freddy's Revenge was his least favorite movie, in which I can't blame the guy. The biggest plus about the movie is that the film consist of 90 minutes in length, and it continues with the nightmares without a whole lot of explanation so, it can't be worst than a two hour and forty-nine minute movie and a length like that is the reason why I refuse to watch that movie with Florence Pugh about Norse cults in Sweden. Again the thing that makes this movie, worth the watch is simply you can see the potential of this movie being a good movie granted this film sadly shot itself in the groin but you can see how to make this film better if you change the title of the film and maybe focus more on the scary moments, even though expecting a different result can be a bad case of madness. Either way if you're looking for a slasher movie to watch or have a double feature of scary movies, Freddy's Revenge is on both HBO Max and Hulu so, deep down if you got nothing better to do or want to turn your brain off then this I would highly recommend watching on Halloween night, hell watch it while it's dark just for fun unless you're that scared.
_theatrical_poster.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment