The ANOES franchise is the only franchise to have it's dignity intact.
-
-
fyfytj — 9 years ago(May 28, 2016 06:59 PM)
While I love this series and it is my favorite of the "Big Three" horror franchises, what you're doing here is being overly generous to these movies and pointing out only good things to say about them, while doing the opposite and being unfair to the other two franchises. Watch, I can do it, too:
Nightmare 1: Tries too hard to be different from other contemporary slashers at the time, has a cheap look and feel to it, and the ending is ridiculous and stupid.
Nightmare 2: Little continuity with the original (especially compared with the sequels), and
breaks the rules that the first movie set up
.
Nightmare 3: Clashing in tone with the first two, being something of a dark fantasy rather than a horror film, and anti-climactic considering that it sets up its characters as formidable dream "warriors", only for them to be easily picked off within minutes of the final battle commencing.
Nightmare 4: Basically a comedic parody of the original movie.
Nightmare 5: Forgettable characters, nonsensical ending, and an overall bland, tired feeling throughout. It's the overexposed antithesis of that originality the first movie gave us only five years previously.
Nightmare 6: You'd think this actually
was
an intended parody. Overly cartoony, characters you care nothing for, a stupid origin story with "dream demons", and a completely anti-climactic ending (despite being the intended climax of the series) when Freddy had much for fitting deaths in previous movies.
New Nightmare: Like the original, it tries to be different from other horror movies of its day, but is long and boring, to boot!
Freddy vs. Jason: Disappointing given the fifteen year wait. Most of the movie features annoying, obnoxious caricatures that take up the movie's time when it could be spent more on Freddy and Jason.
Nightmare 2010: The only thing new this movie did was trying to make us think Freddy was innocent and wrongfully killed, then "surprising" us with the revelation that he was in fact evil all along (shocking!).
Keep in mind that I actually like most of these movies, but I'm making the point that with bias you can spin anything into the way you want it to be presented, by ignoring its bad points and exaggerating the good. -
michaeluk26 — 9 years ago(January 21, 2017 09:19 PM)
Nightmare 1: Tries too hard to be different from other contemporary slashers at the time, has a cheap look and feel to it, and the ending is ridiculous and stupid.
That's because it WAS different with layers of subtext that other horror movies only wish they could achieve. It may look sorta cheap, but certainly better than the Friday and Halloween originals, and it was made with only 1.8 million dollars and had the greatest element in horror history, a man who can kill you in your sleep. Something you cant escape. It had universal appeal as everyone can identify with nightmares. The ending was the fault of Bob Shaye and Wes Craven having to compromise with each other giving us a cluster beep of an ending that is the only thing bad in the movie, aside from some of the acting.
Nightmare 2: Little continuity with the original (especially compared with the sequels), and breaks the rules that the first movie set up.
There were no rules to break. The ending of the original leaves you with either the impression that none of the death happens, if its all a dream, or if Freddy has or will kill them. They had to make part 2 to see where not to go. I agree the human avatar thing was weak. But Freddy is dark and brutal in the film and it is a good horror film if looked at on its own.
Nightmare 3: Clashing in tone with the first two, being something of a dark fantasy rather than a horror film, and anti-climactic considering that it sets up its characters as formidable dream "warriors", only for them to be easily picked off within minutes of the final battle commencing.
You know, it has a great horror atmosphere and the mental hospital setting while bringing back Nancy was a great idea. Some of it is perfect Freddy, but he starts getting way to talkative in this one. I also agree the Dream Warriors were not even effecting Freddy, is was Neil burying the bones. So the plot is jumbled. Not my favorite but its considered the fan favorite by the actors who have been told so on multiple occasions.
Nightmare 4: Basically a comedic parody of the original movie.
I agree. I HATE this movie more than any other in the series. It took the horror element completely out of the series and made Freddy a lame one line spewing jokester.
Nightmare 5: Forgettable characters, nonsensical ending, and an overall bland, tired feeling throughout. It's the overexposed antithesis of that originality the first movie gave us only five years previously.
Nightmare 6: You'd think this actually was an intended parody. Overly cartoony, characters you care nothing for, a stupid origin story with "dream demons", and a completely anti-climactic ending (despite being the intended climax of the series) when Freddy had much for fitting deaths in previous movies.
Part 5 lost me when Amanda Krueger, who had ample opportunity to tell Neil in part 3 that her body needed to be found, pops up with that $hit. I mean really. And the gothic tones clash heavily with the jokey Freddy.
Part 6 was intended to be a parody but still really, you are going to send him out like THIS? Dream Demons were HORRIBLE.
[quote
New Nightmare: Like the original, it tries to be different from other horror movies of its day, but is long and boring, to boot! ]
Nope, New Nightmare is just as brilliant as the original and did what Scream did only better 2 years earlier. Exploring the effects of horror movies of kids, fans, and the actors who played them. Brought Freddy back to being dark and evil. Made him even more evil. Not shown much in the film which is a highlight as it adds tension. Plus it was a perfect 10 year reunion companion piece to the original.
Freddy vs. Jason: Disappointing given the fifteen year wait. Most of the movie features annoying, obnoxious caricatures that take up the movie's time when it could be spent more on Freddy and Jason.
I'm indifferent to it, but its about the best we could have gotten. The kung fu beep from Freddy in the real world was ridiculous.
Nightmare 2010: The only thing new this movie did was trying to make us think Freddy was innocent and wrongfully killed, then "surprising" us with the revelation that he was in fact evil all along (shocking!).
I actually love the remake over parts 4-6 because Freddy was dark again. But the innocent angle is ridiculous. Its already established by the time we find out he was in fact guilty that he was a pedo because of how he talks to Nancy and licks her face in a disgusting manner. Really stupid move.
Haters gonna hate -
svalinanikola — 9 years ago(July 18, 2016 03:16 AM)
I disagree. Stuff like Freddy's Dead and the remake were pretty bad.
Also, how does it keep its dignity when they turned Freddy into a complete joke?
In fact, one of the only things that was liked about the remake is that Freddy wasn't a a jokester, but more serious and menacing. -
Phill24 — 9 years ago(October 14, 2016 12:05 PM)
Out of all the major slasher villains (Freddy, Jason, Myers, Chucky, Leatherface) I think that Freddy got the best sequels out of all of them. For me, even the worst Elm Steet movie is still fun and entertaining to watch.
-
joe_538 — 9 years ago(October 18, 2016 08:22 AM)
It had some low spots with Freddy's Dead and the reboot, and Part 5 was underwhelming.
I think the least-flawed horror series is probably The Evil Dead. But to be fair, if they'd cranked out as many movies as the other franchises, they'd probably have a couple duds as well.
I prefer "lame" zombie Jason. Normal people can't keep coming back from explosions, gunshots, stabbings, falls, and having machetes and axes embedded in their heads. At least, not without occasional medical attention. -
JennaHanson1974 — 9 years ago(January 19, 2017 11:40 AM)
"Nightmare On Elm Street" was my favorite of all horror movies because Freddy Krueger talked. It was creepy when Michael Myers or Jason standing there making no sound, but with them they would play that music whenever they were close. It got boring.. Oh, there's the music again.
It was new for horror movies to have the killer talk, and I liked that. -
ElectricWarlock — 9 years ago(February 01, 2017 09:37 AM)
Well, I'm not very difficult to please. I find that if I enjoy the first film in a series, odds are I'll be able to enjoy the rest. I'd even go as far as to say that each of the big horror franchises only have one weak link. For Friday the 13th that is Jason X, for Halloween it is Resurrection, and for A Nightmare on Elm Street it is the remake. All the rest of them, even if some of the sequels aren't technically "good" they're still fun.
I'd say horror fans are lucky to have all three of the franchises and each has provided me many, many hours of fun. So I thank all involved with each of them even though each has that one movie I just can't get into.