For more pics by yours truly, check out Cartoonlover16's account at Deviantart.com.
A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985)
Directed By: Jack Sholder
Starring: Mark Patton, Kim Myers, Robert Rusler, Clu Gulager, Hope Lange, Christie Clark, Marshall Bell, Melinda O. Fee, Tom McFadden, Sydney Walsh
as Freddy Krueger"Man, looks like I got a little out of hand while shaving."
Welcome back to Part 2 at my look at the Nightmare On Elm Street
series. Up next, we're looking at the Craven-less sequel Freddy's Revenge
, a film that makes you wonder, "what the hell was I eating to make a crazy monster pop out of my stomach?"
No, not that.
Anyways, before we look at the film, let's look at the history at the film....
Because of the surprising success of Wes Craven's brilliant 1984 horror film A Nightmare On Elm Street
, of course New Line Cinema wanted to release a sequel. Of course, Wes didn't want to be part of this sequel, because he never wanted the film to spawn into a franchise, and even wanted the film to have a happy ending, instead of that ending that was the equivalent of the middle finger (in this case, Freddy's middle finger.
But as we all know, movie executives always take on the dare, "how many sequels can we make until people can't stand them anymore?", so New Line Cinema hired got a new writer and director to see if they could make the saga of Krueger better. The result? They didn't. "Ah, don't worry. Freddy's only taking revenge on Jackie Earle Haley.Freddy's Revenge
has been often criticized by some fans as the worst of the series, due to the lack of Freddy (he only appears in a total of 13 minutes), and it's supposed homosexual undertones. Yeah, the film isn't as masterful as the original, but as far as sequels go, it could've been worse. It could've had endless fighting and rambling exposition, like a certain retro sequel I've mentioned before.......
Uggh, could someone burn it with fire, please?Y'know, I'm not really getting into The Asylum's ripoff of Anaconda.Uhhhh.....symbolism?WHAT'S THE FILM ABOUT?
Several years after the events of the first movie, Jesse Walsh (Patton) and his family moved into the home of Nancy Thompson, the only survivor of Freddy Krueger (Englund) 's reign of terror.
Haunted by dreams of the disfigured child-killer, Freddy takes control of his mind and body so the body count can continue...
Looks like Jesse is watching what he eats!WHAT'S BAD ABOUT IT?
Despite the interesting idea, it's not really pulled off really well here. The plot suffers from a repetitive structure - Jesse has a nightmare, goes to school, gets possessed by Krueger, kills off a character, etc. And only two main characters are killed off during all of this. By the time the second kill is made in this, I'm pretty sure Jason made his 17th kill in the latest Friday the 13th
The main character Jesse is kind of a wimp here. How could Freddy POSSIBLY want to possess this guy when he does incredibly cheesy stuff like this:
You sure know how to pick 'em, Krueger.
Also, did we REALLY need to see Lisa (Myers) make out with Jesse while he's in Freddy's body? I know she was trying to save Jesse and all, but the image of a girl kissing a scarred killer is the equivalent of...well....
....yeah. By the way, DON'T ASK.WHAT'S GOOD ABOUT IT?
The special effects, if minimal, are pretty top-notch here, which is kinda weird, considering that special effects always degrade by the time the second sequel come around. Right, Mortal Kombat: Annihilation
Of course, the best part that shows off these effects is the scene where Freddy slowly bursts out of Jesse's body and raids a pool party, which is often noted as one of the memorable scene in the series. This summer, Freddy is ready to PARTY in A Beach Party On Elm Street!
The acting isn't all that bad, either. Kim Myers is pretty damn good as Jesse's concerned girlfriend, as she feels for Jesse and tries all that she can do to help and Myers pulls this off with pure determination in her performance. She's not as good as Nancy Langenkamp in the previous movie, but as a seperate movie, Myers does some good here.
Finally, for a horror sequel, this one actually TRIES here. Even though the plot can be repetitve and doesn't really go deep into the origins of Krueger (thank God for #3, but we'll get to that next review), but at least writer David Chaskin knows that the way to make a sequel is to do something different instead of being like the Friday The 13th
movies, which is just a line of movies with a killer killing off idiotic campers. I don't see how people can hate this movie even though it does what a sequel is supposed to do: continue the damn story!"Uh, Freddy? Why are you picking my nose?""Uhhhh, let's keep that kiss between you and me, OK, Freddy?"Some men were destined to witness something great...these two were destined to watch exploding pet birds.BOTTOM LINE:
OK, so it isn't as good as the original (of course), but it's mildly entertaining. It does continue the story in a way, the effects are top-notch, and the characters are still fine to deal with, but that's probably because there's less of Freddy to deal with unlike the rest of the sequels. Maybe in this movie's case, less is better.OVERALL SCORE:
And while this movie isn't as good as the first movie, thankfully we got A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors
to help make up for this. See ya later!