Friday, July 29, 2011

Did Freddy Krueger fall prey to Hollywood and get some Botox and a face lift?

Before watching the new Nightmare on Elm Street 2011 movie last night I knew before hand from watching numerous interviews with the director and cast that they had apparently made “minor” changes to the new Freddy Krueger but it seems like the producer and the makeup artist need to pick up an Oxford dictionary and look up the meaning of minor as they have NO friggin clue what it means because to them the minor changes was his physical appearance and his voice. That’s like me telling my friends I’m going to get some MINOR plastic surgery but later come out of the operating room looking like Cher.

To me it looked like he had just gotten some work done before the filming of this movie don’t believe me here are some pics of the new and "improved" Freddy:

 Then to have the nerve to use a totally different actor for the role after we have grown to love and cherish the original one Robert Englund was a surprise i didn't really like. I mean once you get news that the original actor won’t play in the new movie the words “ABORT!ABORT!” should cross your mind as a producer but if you feel you just HAVE to continue on then bloody hell at least get a good enough replacement! I mean the new guy sounded like he had a fur ball stuck in his throat the whole movie; he was scrawnier and looked more like a ghoul than a serial killer. Hihihi ok re-reading that now I couldn’t help but burst out laughing but seriously though what’s next? An obese Pinhead in a new Hellraiser movie or the opposite an anorexic Jason??!! I guess basically what I’m trying to say to all the producers and directors out there is that if you plan to make a remake of a classic successful horror movie just keep in mind that there are millions of devoted some even obsessed fans i.e. Me :P who became that because we fell in love with the main character of that movie, therefore if you are to do a remake then don’t change the main character instead change the plot, which I think the directors of Halloween have done well because even though the story changes over time in the different remakes Michael Myers still physically remains somewhat the same.

What bugs me even more is that this movie was produced in friggin 2011??!! How is it possible that the character in a 1984 movie is scarier than one in 2011 when we are supposedly more technologically advanced??!! How is a makeup artist in 1984 much better than one today, the Freddy Krueger in the older movies burnt look looked more believable than in this new remake where in my eyes he looked more sautéed than burnt. I guess this leads me to my final questions for the day: If you have watched the new Nightmare on Elm Street movie what are your thoughts on it and the new improved Freddy? Also why do you think older horror movies are scarier than new age ones shouldn’t it be the other way around since we are supposed to be more advanced?

Oh by the way if you want to read a full review on this movie then please go and check it out on Marvin the Macabre blog Films my spouse made me watch and the link to the movie review is here: and don’t forget to follow his banging blog he really puts in a lot of work when writing his reviews so I hope you enjoy his site.

P.S the reason I have kind of been M.I.A on my blog is because I travelled to spend my summer vacation at home and have just been settling in and spending some one on one bonding time with la familia but now that I’m sick of their faces I’m back again! Hahaha jokes but yeah I was also having internet problems at home so that’s why I went kind of went silent for a bit but like Rocky Balboa I’m back again babeeeee and I aint going nowhere!! :D

Love, Peace and Bloody-coated hugs


  1. Yeah I did not care for this remake or reimagining or reboot whatever they want to call it nowadays. Robert Englund is too much a part of Freddy that with a new actor it was doomed from the start. It's a little different when you have a masked killer or one who doesn't have to talk. You can maybe get a way with getting another actor but Freddy it just doesn't work. The sad part is I like Jackie earl haley I just think no one can replace Englund as Kruegar

  2. Where to begin...

    I think I read briefly in passing the reasons why Englund didn't sign up for the project but then again, I probably didn't because I wouldn't have forgotten a recent soundbite from Freddy, the man himself. I do know Wes was dead broke during the first film's release so he signed ownership over to Shaye and New Line. Which is why we have this abomination of a remake.

    I didn't care for Jackie Earle Haley's rendition of Freddy but he was not the worst part of that film. Those emo, non-acting "teenagers" were. And that's why I didn't care for the plot because I didn't care about the characters. Bottom line: Haley can't be Englund and he clearly wasn't trying to be. This wasn't child killer Freddy, this was SVU molester Freddy which, o-kay, I'll buy since when went the sexual subtext-to-maintext route.

    Halloween has 2 split mythologies - one that focuses on Laurie and one that focuses on Jamie. Many fans hate that split. I think more so because they weren't tied together and people think those middle Halloween movies were just utter crap, period. I enjoyed them all for different reasons.

    I think with the convenience of technology, supernatural special effects don't grab us as much as because it simply looks fake. Back in '84 when they had no choice but to be thorough (and remembering that Elm Street was pretty much put together to spit and popsicle sticks) with makeup effects, not to mention Wes and crews meticulousness. The makeup guy(s) looked at a pizza and thought, 'I got something here' and studied photos of burn victims.
    I can't tell you what these news guys were thinking.

    With older movies because of budgets they were less polished, got actors who looked like your neighbor from down the street instead of a body off a casting assembly line, and the directors intent on making a statement. Which we all know is a dying art form. They were gritty. Which is all why they hold up so well. That's why they're scarier than what's being pumped now.

    Wrote a review on Elm Street 2011 myself on my blog. And I was like, really, really pissed about it that day.

  3. Hey Pixie! I wondered where you went!

    Wow. That new Freddy looks like some kind of frog-man swamp creature. That's really bad. I don't understand changing a character that is actually working, but if you have to make a change, at least make it good! Ugh.

    I agree that the Halloween movies are at least consistent. I watched every one of them during a very boring high school summer vacation. In fact the Michael Myers character (and plots) were so so similar that most of those movies blend together! The first through the third in that series are clear in my mind, as is Halloween H20, but everything in between is a blur! :)

    What's funny is that despite seeing every Halloween movie in existence, I have never seen one Freddy movie.

  4. Ugh...that new Freddy looks completely ridiculous. He looks like a fish. No me gusta!

  5. Englund will always be Freddy to me. Saw him at a convention once, and he told about how he woke up from a brief nap while in makeup in his location trailer and saw himself in a mirror, terrifying himself. That's scary makeup.

  6. Hey Pixie,
    Thanks for the great shout-out in your post. I just wanted to add a response to your question about why a 1984 movie would be scarier than the 2011 version. I think it has everything to do with money. All of our most cherished horror classics were low-budget labors of love. Directors really had to rise to the challenge of scaring the crap out of people with limited resources. These remakes are all big-budget, movie-by-committee type films that are more interested in cashing in on established franchises than in breaking new ground. The availibility of money is actually detrimental to the creative process. That's why today's horror fans needs to be looking toward indie horror for the next new classic.

  7. @Slowdeath 77 i totally agree i jst think no can really top Robert Englund and i like Jackie Earl Haley too but in OTHER roles and even tho it was said many of his fans had pushed him to take the role i think it was kind of a wrong move.

    @Ashlee wow i didnt really know about Wes being dead broke but i mean still he shouldve known to jst let the dream of a remake go, as i always say its better to leave fans with the memory of how good the older movies were rather than leaving them with a bitter taste of a remake that sucked on epic proportions.

    On the makeup bit i find jst really odd and it really pisses me off how fake looking all these new horror movies are nowadays and i think Marvin the Macabre is totally right in saying that these new age movies are crap because they have so much money to blow and they dnt care about how creative the movie is but rather how much money they will make at the box office. Oh i ddnt knw u wrote a review on ur blog i will def go check it out in a bit.

    @ Justine HEY!!!! yea i knw i went away for quiet a while but im back now its jst been a bit hard getting back into the mode of posting things i guess im still in "chill-vacation mode". I know right the makeup is completely atrocious i wonder if the makeup artists even took the time to research pics of burned victims to at least get the makeup done right, but even then they ddnt hve to do tht all they had to do was look at how the original Freddy looked and worked from there but still keeping all his main features in tact.
    OMG you havent watched a Freddy Krueger movie yet??!!! wow you totally have to watch at least one i swear you wont regret it but if you do please watch the older classics first before you watch the recent flop of a remake cas im scared you'll get put of watching the rest if you do it vice versa.

    @Real Queen of Horror Bahahahah i think Justine said it best "a frog-man swamp creature"hihihihi

    @Sidney WOW you atually got to see him in person thats friggin AWESOME i wud totally faint if i did as embarassing as it sounds lol. This newage makeup sucks monkey balls and i dnt knw but hve you noticed that even the blood in these new horror movies looks really fake too i mean horror movies from back in the day put in so much effort to make sure the blood looked as realistic as they cud make it.

    @Marvin the Macabre No probs. I think you said it best when you said it has all to do with money, i guess i jst expected that since now you have the financial resources they wud put in even more effort in the making of the movie but sadly i guess im wrong but yeah i think im going to start watching Indie horror movies more they seem to be more realistic and creative..

  8. Yeah, I bet you have a lot to catch up on in blog-land! Sometimes it's overwhelming for me to read everyone's blogs and keep writing, myself. So how has your vacation been going?

    You're right - It wouldn't be complicated to just copy the last Freddy look. I think sometimes people are so stuck on being original, that they make up crummy new things. Even when the first thing was perfect! So Freddy is a burn victim, hey? As a kid I thought he looked like he had pizza dripping off his face. :)

    Someday I'll probably see one of those movies. I'll take your advice and start from the beginning. I'm funny with movies - either I get obsessed and watch every one in the series or I watch none in the series!