31 Days of Horror 4: Originals vs. Remakes DAY 4

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) vs. A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

Original

“One, two, Freddy's coming for you.
Three, four, better lock your door.
Five, six, grab your crucifix.
Seven, eight, better stay awake.
Nine, ten, never sleep again.”

Yeah, the song is still creepy.

Another icon in the horror world, Freddy Krueger is a fan favorite. As, the years went on Krueger’s sequels declined in quality, except for New Nightmare, and the franchise hit a wall after Freddy vs. Jason.

Yet, let’s remember what made Freddy, well, Freddy and talk about why the original worked so well.

The movie is about a group of teenagers in the town of Springwood, who are being haunted by a burnt figure that invades their dreams and turns them into their worst nightmares.
This burnt figure is the ghost of Freddy Krueger (a.k.a The Springwood Slasher), a child murderer that was killed by the neighborhood parents.
He seeks revenge and finds he can take vengeance where the parents can’t save them, where they’re most vulnerable – in their dreams.
Now, one by one, as they fall asleep the teenagers are beginning to be picked off by the claw wielding maniac and even pills and coffee will not work and as they lay their head down they know that they are going to be battling Freddy for their lives.

The whole idea of a killer hunting you down in your dreams was and still is a terrifying concept.

The original A Nightmare on Elm Street was a film that targeted our most primal fears. It gave us a killer that not only inhabited the dream world but also had a voice.

Freddy would talk to his victims, something Jason and Michael didn’t do. He had a personality, which made him much more threatening.

Today the film still holds up, for the most part. Some might find parts of the movie cheesy, but for the most part this movie still works well.

Remake

The 2010 remake of the classic is not only disappointing but it’s also pointless.

They took the basic premise of the original and gave Freddy more of a back story. I don’t understand why they find it necessary to give these psychopaths a deeper back story. It didn’t work with Michael Myers and it didn’t work here.

This remake should have never been made. The original was perfect and then they try to mimic that but fall flat on their face. Characters go undeveloped and the script lacks creativity that the original had. Because of this mediocre script the film is just boring to watch, we know what is going to happen next and it’s chore to get through.

Jackie Earl Haley takes the reins from Robert Englund and he doesn’t try to be Robert’s Freddy but he tries to create a more sinister character. It would have worked better if the characters he was tormenting were more interesting. Yet, the teens in this movie were just cardboard cut outs getting ready to get killed by Freddy.

So, which is better?

The original by leaps and bounds, the 2010 film is a waste of time. The 1984 movie might be dated by today’s standards but it does everything right. The 2010 film only gets the visuals right but fails on script, characters and special effects.

Original Wins