The first A Nightmare on Elm Street is one of those classic horror films that just doesn't warrant being remade. Although fun, the subsequent sequels weren't up to the level that the first one was, only being made pretty much to milk the idea (if they were all top notch I would think differently).
But they were sequels, the lesser of the two evils - remakes are a different story...
The original series, and knowledge of the character, is still fresh enough that doing a remake (or reboot, or whatever they're labeling it) seems pretty pointless. Freddy Krueger is one of those rare characters that having anyone else other than the original guy, Robert Englund, playing him is just dumb. Jason Voorhees and Michael Meyers, to name just a couple of examples, can be replaced as far as actors go because they are behind a mask.
But Englund didn't just play Krueger... he was him.
There's been a lot of speculation about how close this remake will stick to the original: Will they make it a straight, event-by-event 21st century update or will they put a completely new spin on it? Rob Zombie tried the latter with his remake of Halloween... and just look how that one turned out.
Latino Review got a chance to get a look at the newest draft of the script, and via a video review have let us know some details about the plot:
After being burned alive by a mob of angry parents, a pre-school gardener/caretaker named Freddy returns for revenge against the children, now 18 years old, that accused him of sexual abuse. But was Freddy a child molester or was he falsely accused? This is the central question and main addition to the film's plot. Freddy doesn't have many lines, but that isn't all that surprising considering that the film's producers have said the character doesn't joke around.
In principal, I like the idea of going a new direction with an update of a classic character (if we have to have a remake in the first place, that is), but what they've added here is not a good idea. Making it so that Krueger's guilt comes into question? Doesn't that go against his evil nature? The whole point of the character is that he was a child molester, was killed by a mob of angry parents, and he comes back in the afterlife to seek revenge and causes malicious, horrific havoc on the late-teens who occupy Elm Street (and anyone else who enters his sights).
It's encouraging to read that the producers say that the character "doesn't joke around," but trying to add some moral side to what is supposed to be one of the most evil movie characters of all time is downright strange. Maybe this won't be the final direction they go in - hopefully they write another draft sans this new moral angle, or perhaps that's a red herring and it'll be shown by the end of the film that he was in fact, guilty.
What are your thoughts on the new addition to the plot? Shouldn't Krueger just be evil and that's that?
A Nightmare on Elm Street is set to be released on April 16th, 2010.
Sources: LatinoReview and /Film