The Return Of The Springwood Slasher?

[Mitch Henessey]

It’s only been five years since New Line and Platinum Dunes tried their hand at remaking Wes Craven‘s classic horror flick A Nightmare on Elm Street, the film that brought the taunting slasher Freddy Krueger into all our nightmares. But in Hollywood years, that’s a lifetime, so it’s time for another reboot.

A new reboot of A Nightmare on Elm Street is in the works at New Line Cinema again, and this one will ignore the 2010 reboot that starred Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy Krueger. Find out who will be writing the script for the A Nightmare on Elm Street reboot after the jump!

The Tracking Board reports it will be Orphan scribe David Leslie Johnson writing the script this time, but there’s no director or producers on board the project as of yet. So far only New Line’s Toby Emmerich, Walter Hamada and Dave Neustadter are overseeing for the studio, so the project is still pretty early in development.

A Nightmare on Elm Street is one of several horror franchises that, much like the character who haunts endless dreams, just won’t die. Freddy Krueger (originally played by Robert Englund) stands with Michael Myers from Halloween and Jason Voorhees from Friday the 13th as a horror icon, but just like those other two seemingly immortal killers, they’ve also worn out their welcome from time to time.

Krueger has always been the more playful and silly of the iconic, recurring slashers, spouting off one-liners and campy jokes to his victims before he kills them. He even battled Jason Voorhees in the silly match-up Freddy vs. Jason in 2003, and has spun off into several novels, comic books and video games as well.

Though the 2010 reboot has a respectable cast (including Rooney Mara in the lead) and tried desperately to remake the film for a new generation, it just didn’t separate itself enough from the original film and instead was simply boring, lacking in any true horror. If anything, it just seemed to take itself far too seriously. Or maybe we just live in a world where a killer like Freddy Krueger just doesn’t work anymore. Though I’m sure someone out there has an idea to bring Freddy back from the dead.

But either way, New Line is going to try yet again to make this 31-year old franchise work. It’s not clear how soon this one might get off the ground since Johnson is also slated to script the new Dungeons & Dragons movie for Warner Bros. that was announced earlier this week, so stay tuned to see how this one develops.

We’re definitely looking at a resurgence of classic horror characters yet again with a new Friday the 13th in the works, a return to Halloween, and another Texas Chainsaw Massacre sequel on the way too. And before you know it we’ll miraculously get a movie that brings all those horror icons together somehow.

http://www.slashfilm.com/nightmare-on-elm-street-reboot/

[YOUTUBE]uajOQCQBKFY[/YOUTUBE]​

We're still in the rumor stages with this one, so nothing is official just yet.

Resurrecting Freddy Krueger for another run on the big screen is a tricky task. They're going to have a hard time trying to reintroduce 80's Freddy with a hokey style of dark humor now a days. They tried a more serious and darker approach with Jackie Earle Haley's Krueger in the 2010 remake, and the vast majority of Elm Street fans and critics hated this version of Freddy.

And there's the Robert Englund problem. Englund made the decision to end his run as Krueger at a horror convention not too long ago, but Englund's name and his face are synonymous with Freddy Krueger. He made the character, and you can't hide Freddy behind a mask, without risking the inevitable backlash from fans.

To make matters worse, you have a potential disaster, if Michael Bay makes the decision to have a more hands-on role. It's been a while, and I can't remember, where I read the interview, but Bay wants to direct a horror movie in the future.

Usually, I try to have a positive outlook, but the 2010 remake was an awful film. And like most horror series, after the first film, the Elm Street franchise hit a schizophrenic tailspin with an atrocious sequel (Freddy's Revenge), a few surprises, and a mediocre film (Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare), so I can't think of a reason to have any hope for this.

Also, you get the feeling Hollywood is running out of ideas (again) for mainstream horror, if this actually happens. The Insidious franchise is losing steam, the finale for Paranormal Activity is coming up in October, and it'll be damn near impossible for The Conjuring 2 to live up to or surpass expectations. Remember, Voorhees and Myers are supposed to return next year, Chucky made his return in a new straight-to-video film a few years ago, and you had the attempt at an antihero approach with Leatherface in Texas Chainsaw 3D.

Is anyone else interested in the possibility of Freddy Krueger's return?

 

[SSJPhenom]

Like with most things I grew up watching, I'd love to see it come back, however, they have to get it right. These studio buffs need to understand that they don't need to change Freddy to introduce him to new fans. Freddy was great the way he was in the 80's. What I'd like to see is a new Elm Street movie with the same old Freddy, however, with a really strong plot/story and really strong action.

 

[TootsieBear]

Not only will I watch it, I'll probably end up loving like the new Terminator movie. Hopefully it'll be a good movie if released.

 

[Wally Dangerously]

FUCK!


This pisses me off. I have absolutely no interest in another Nightmare reboot. I didn't watch the 2010 film and I wouldn't watch this one at gun point either, no matter who is playing Freddy or who is writing the script.

The original Nightmare is one of the greatest horror films of all-time and no reboot will ever come close to it.

Let Freddy stay dead...

 

[Mitch Henessey]

There's no official word on this happening, but in a recent interview Englund believes they're going for a Dream Warriors remake:

Well, I left America before this really sort of hit the tweets, and my only knowledge or gossip is that apparently they approached Tuesday Knight – she’s the young actress from Nightmare on Elm Street Part 4, who replaced Patricia Arquette. I was trying to think ‘what does that mean?’ They can’t possibly be remaking Nightmare on Elm Street Part 1 again – they just did that. I think they may be remaking Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3.

This is all speculation. Part 3, Dream Warriors, is the most successful film, and the most popular of the franchise. And it would make sense for them on a kind of Nightmare on Elm Street cinematic pun, to hire Tuesday to play the mother in Part 3, Patricia Arquette’s mother, because that would mean she’s playing her own mother. Obviously Tuesday’s older now, it kind of makes sense. So that’s my theory.

They’re not gonna bring me back for Freddy, but perhaps they would bring me back in a cameo as the elderly dream expert at the local clinic for dream analysis or dream therapy or something like that. Maybe they would be smart or wise enough to capitalize on that.

If Englund's theory is true, then it's an odd choice for a remake. Dream Warriors is a beloved sequel, and most Elm Street and horror fans believe it's the best film in the series, so you'll have to deal with another backlash, and I just get the feeling remaking Dream Warriors is one experiment that'll backfire no matter how hard they try.

In other Elm Street related news, it looks like Freddy's Nightmares will return to TV. They're not rebooting the series, but the old series that ran from 1988-1990 will return on El Rey Network in a few months. For a while the Chiller Channel ran the reruns, but they stopped airing the show about four years ago. A full set for Freddy's Nightmares is not available on DVD or Blu-Ray, so I'm glad the show is making a return to TV.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Eh, I dunno if I'd be interested. I might watch it just for the sake of a novelty, but part of me would be more interested in seeing an origin story for Freddy without much of the supernatural aspect. I'd include some supernatural aspects such as various malevolent forces helping guide, influence him or otherwise become interested in him because of his deeds.

I know that Freddy was a child killer, but I'm unclear as to whether or not he was a pedophile as well. If he was a killer and not a pedophile, I'd include him being a there's nothing more despicable or discomforting than a child raping serial killer. pedophile in the origin story and include scenes of him engaging, or at least looking as though, he's engaging in child rape, before killing his victim. Why? Personally, I want a villain that I can be genuinely disgusted with, made uncomfortable by and want to see get what he deserves rather than cheer him on, which is what a lot of people do with these slasher films; or rather, it's what many of them do now. Chase down the horny, drug addled, half naked teenagers, kill them in inventive and/or brutal ways, etc. and sort of view the villain as some sort of hero.

A lot of people consider The Exorcist to be the greatest and scariest horror film ever made for a variety of reasons. One of the most understated is the subject matter: an innocent child is possessed by demonic forces. It's a subject matter that taps into a primal fear that millions of people have and have had throughout the ages. In the case of Freddie as a pedophiliac serial killer, graphically employing his work on innocent children would horrify people, it'd disgust them and it'd make them want to see him obliterated: exactly what you should want to see happen to the primary antagonist in a horror film.

I'm not saying the idea would work, maybe it'd be too much for mainstream audiences and would scare the crap out of movie studios. However, I think exploring the core of what Freddy is in a graphic & controversial manner and, if it's successful, going from there MIGHT be the only plausible way to reboot the franchise without making it a rehash of stuff that's already been done 30 years ago.

I enjoyed Jackie Earl Haley as Freddy, his performance in the 2010 film was great in my opinion even though the film itself felt more like an homage to the original film than a reboot, and thought he brought a genuine creepiness back to the role that it hadn't had in decades. Haley has experience and has earned great acclaim playing the role of a pedophile in films, he portrayed one in the 2006 film Little Children, won a number of film critics awards for the role and was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

I know that Freddy was a child killer, but I'm unclear as to whether or not he was a pedophile as well. If he was a killer and not a pedophile, I'd include him being a there's nothing more despicable or discomforting than a child raping serial killer. pedophile in the origin story and include scenes of him engaging, or at least looking as though, he's engaging in child rape, before killing his victim. Why? Personally, I want a villain that I can be genuinely disgusted with, made uncomfortable by and want to see get what he deserves rather than cheer him on, which is what a lot of people do with these slasher films; or rather, it's what many of them do now. Chase down the horny, drug addled, half naked teenagers, kill them in inventive and/or brutal ways, etc. and sort of view the villain as some sort of hero.

A lot of people consider The Exorcist to be the greatest and scariest horror film ever made for a variety of reasons. One of the most understated is the subject matter: an innocent child is possessed by demonic forces. It's a subject matter that taps into a primal fear that millions of people have and have had throughout the ages. In the case of Freddie as a pedophiliac serial killer, graphically employing his work on innocent children would horrify people, it'd disgust them and it'd make them want to see him obliterated: exactly what you should want to see happen to the primary antagonist in a horror film.

Englund and others talk about this in the Never Sleep Again documentary for the Elm Street series. I'm paraphrasing here, but I remember Englund saying something along the lines of "you're not supposed to like, praise, or glorify Freddy Krueger", because he's a despicable human being. But he's popular, because he's the titular character and face of one of the more beloved horror franchises.

Again, I'm paraphrasing here, but in the same documentary, Heather Langenkamp and others talk about Freddy's cartoonish antics and his hokey sense of humor, and they believe the reason for it all, is so they can gloss over Krueger being this sadistic pedophile, and with this approach, you have a more marketable character.

Also, they're more of a plot device, but every now and then, the Elm Street series took some time to explore the darker side of Freddy's past and the story throughout the series with flashbacks to explain how it all began, with the inmates at the asylum raping Amanda (Freddy's mother), and the rape leading to Freddy's birth, Freddy being a target for teasing and bullying as a child, and Freddy's abusive stepfather pushing him over the edge.

There's a chance a darker and more unnerving version of Krueger (something close to New Nightmare Freddy Krueger) could work, because they're going to have a hard time trying to reintroduce the 80's style version of Krueger with a campy style of humor. Although, as you pointed out, there's a slim chance it'll actually happen, because the powers that be will be more concerned with the backlash for pushing the envelope jeopardizing their bottom line.