Theatrical Review: A Nightmare on Elm Street (Samuel Bayer, 2010)

More often than not, horror remakes are abysmal failures with critics and moviegoers alike. The trend in Hollywood plaguing the genre for the past several years has resulted in an older generation disgusted with the debauchery of the original films and a younger generation whose initial experience with the iconic characters of these classics has been with the many haphazard remakes. There are a few noteworthy exceptions, but A Nightmare on Elm Street, the subject of the latest re-imagining, is not quite one of them. While it is not a downright abomination as was the case with the remake of Black Christmas, it fails to live up to the expectations levied by the many hopeful fans.

I believe part of the reason this remake is being received so poorly, and why I personally walked away unsatisfied, is due to the fact that Wes Craven delivered a near-perfect update on Freddy in 1994 with Wes Craven’s New Nightmare. Deviating from the excessive satire and shoddy screenwriting that plagued many of the later sequels, Craven returned to his creation and reinvented it. Freddy was given a whole new appearance, including a new glove, which complemented the more ominous nature he exhibited in the original film. Furthermore, the narrative was given much-needed originality, taking place in the real world where Heather Langenkamp, who played Nancy in the first and third films, becomes increasingly concerned with her son, Dylan, who is being tormented by Freddy in his dreams. That’s right: Freddy Krueger has entered the real world. After seeking the console of Robert Englund, John Saxon (who played Nancy’s father), and even Wes Craven himself, Heather struggles to fill the role of Nancy one last time in order to vanquish Freddy once and for all.

(From left to right: Freddy in 1984, 1994, and 2010. Click image to enlarge.)

Moving on, though, the new film is a spirited remake of the original that sports a more realistic-looking Freddy, a more detailed history of how Freddy came to be the boogeyman he is, and little else. There are nods to the original film, as no doubt many have recognized from their presence in the theatrical trailers. Namely, the glove rising from between Nancy’s (Rooney Mara) legs while she dozes off during a bubble bath, Freddy coming through the wall while Nancy lies asleep in bed, and Kris (played by Katie Cassidy; her character was named Tina in the original) being dragged around her bedroom while her horrified boyfriend watches are the most noteworthy throwbacks. Unfortunately, they are executed rather poorly. The claw in the bathtub is wholly expected, and is not nearly as effective as it was in 1984; the CGI used during Freddy’s transit through the wall is lackluster, and Kris is hurled around her room so randomly and rapidly that it becomes laughable in its hyperbolized frenzy, the atrocious acting from Kris doing naught to mend the situation.

The film moves forward at somewhat of a rapid pace, which causes the more intriguing aspects of the narrative to suffer. Freddy is given a more detailed background as a child molester who preyed on Nancy and her friends when they were younger, but unfortunately a good chunk of the film is spent with Nancy and her friend Quentin (Kyle Gallner; the role is essentially the equivalent of Glen, who was played by Johnny Depp in the original) under the impression that Freddy was wrongfully accused of molesting children, though it is never really believable due to the severe logical fallacy it presents. Why would Freddy be killing all of these kids because their parents burned him alive, but then stop to show one of them (Quentin) that he was actually innocent? If he was truly innocent, would it not have made more sense to try and convince several kids of the fact in order to clear his name? Given that it is Freddy proposing that he was innocent while simultaneously offing characters one after another, this portion of the film (which is already much too short) is utterly wasted on such an absurd proposition.

The remake is not without its merits, however. Later in the film, after Nancy and Quentin have been awake for a few days straight, they begin experiencing micro-naps, essentially dreaming while they are awake. During these moments, the viewer is transported back in forth between the real world and Freddy’s, allowing for some truly interesting scenes that unfurl rather nicely. Then there is Jackie Earle Haley, who shines as Freddy Krueger. He is menacing and perverted, but not without a sense of humor – an aspect of his character that is, thankfully, not overdone or abused in its application; what few one-liners he has are both clever and representative of his personality. Some might find his voice to be a bit too similar to that of Rorschach (whom Haley portrayed in Watchmen), but I believe it was fitting and served its purpose of making Freddy more intimidating.

Overall, this re-imagining comes as something of a letdown, perhaps due to the fact that Wes Craven succeeded over fifteen years ago in doing it properly, thus raising the bar even higher than it already had been. It is understandable that in attempting to capture the essence of the original, the changes would not be comparable to Craven’s 1994 update, but this fact winds up serving as the main problem for the film, for what is kept is either overdone or out of place in relation to the rest of the film. Also, the added subject of pedophilia is dealt with at too great of a distance, failing to enhance the characters’ personalities (other than Freddy’s), for better or for worse. Haley is reportedly signed on to portray Freddy in two more films, but I am skeptical as to whether or not they will be an improvement over this effort. Perhaps after Craven is finished with his new trilogy of Scream films, he will return to Freddy one last time and give his sadistic, iconic slasher a final, grand sendoff. One can only dream…

C+

Theatrical Review: Repo Men (Miguel Sapochnik, 2010)

When I first saw the preview for Repo Men, I thought that the premise was bit too similar to Repo! The Genetic Opera (Darren Lynn Bousman, 2008), a film that was based on a play of the same name. Furthermore, I was a bit stunned to learn that the Repo Men is apparetly an adaptation of Eric Garcia's The Repossession Mambo, a novel released in 2009. I wonder if Garcia may have based his story on Bousman's film and/or the play. Does all of that seem a bit confusing? If I have managed to at least get your mind running in something akin to a circle, then you are on your way to understanding how a film like Repo Men works.

Remy (Jude Law) and Jake (Forest Whitaker) are childhood friends and work as partners for a company called The Union, which specializes in providing synthetic organs (called "artiforgs") to those in need at astronomical prices. However, the price tag does little to hinder folks from virtually signing their own death warrant, thanks predominately to the salesman pitch of Frank (Liev Shrieber), who seems to relish in telling his clients that "You owe it to yourself; you owe it your family," assuring them that there are several payment plans available to accommodate any lifestyle. Still, it is virtually inevitable that those who purchase artiforgs will fall behind on their payments, and after a few months of leeway, Remy and Jake are among the Repo Men sent by The Union to repossess them, which typically results in the client's death.

Remy is pretty much the best at what he does, which is a cause for concern within The Union when he decides (in part due to the fact that his wife will likely leave him otherwise) that he does not particularly care to continue his line of work, preferring instead to work in sales. Then, ironically enough, while carrying out his final repo, Remy finds himself in need of an artificial heart thanks to his equipment malfunctioning. So, his wife leaves him (taking their son with her), and now that he has become one of the very individuals he has spent his career hunting down, Remy finds that he can no longer stomach his work. Since he refuses to work, he makes no money, and quickly falls behind on his payments. Eventually, the film turns into both an action flick and a love story as Remy must evade his former co-workers that are now tracking him down, but not without the help of the lovely Beth (Alice Braga), who is more artificial than human thanks to the double-digit number of artiforgs keeping her alive.

Even though there are some scenes of gore, a bit of action here and there, and a romantic interest that comes in to play in the second half of the film, Repo Men is a dark comedy at heart. At most times, it is cleverly satirical, especially in the first and third acts. There are two key twists that occur in the last act, one of which is predictable to some degree, and another that caught me almost completely by surprise. The latter of these two, when reflecting on the film during the credits, was something I came to admire due its function as a proper explanation for the utterly bizarre (and somewhat incoherent) nature of what transpires in the last thirty minutes. I had a lot of questions during that time, and one simple revelation answered all of them while simultaneously accentuating the sardonic aspects of the film. Some viewers might be turned off by it, but I thought it was fitting, especially for a film laden with twisted humor. Repo Men deals with a particular something (it would be cruel of me to spoil it) that, in my experience, is rarely seen in film, and even more of a rarity is to see it executed effectively, as I believe it is here.

B