New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Point A: Aside from Englund and a few marked references to the events of the first film via a diary from one of the original characters, Freddy's Revenge doesn't have a lot of ties to the first film. What's interesting is that for much of the new talent involved here, this marks the high point of their career, relatively speaking. Since Craven - who had written and directed the first film - opted not to return, a new writer and director were both hired. Jack Holder had directed an earlier film for the studio and would go on to make a charming little sci-fi actioner entitled The Hidden in 1987 before sticking mostly to TV movies and episodes over the next two decades. David Chaskin's IMDb resume only lists a handful of writing credits before and after Freddy's Revenge.

What's interesting to me is how Chaskin's screenplay seems like it must have existed prior to the first Elm Street and was quickly adapted to retrofit it for the Krueger character. It doesn't have the feel of a horror film except in fits and starts, although it does follow the time-honored template of beginning with a nightmarish opening that turns out to be a dream and ending with an "are we still in reality or back in a dream" kicker that is not so-subtle code for "we're leaving that there sequel door open again." In the Elm Street universe, Freddy's Revenge has had its bastard child status enhanced by virtue of the fact that subsequent installments (specifically parts three, four and five) all take place in quick succession and with one or more recurring characters and that the events of Freddy's Revenge are never referenced again. If Chaskin was hired to quickly crank out this in '85, it's doubly intriguing that both he and New Line decided this was the direction to take the Krueger character. The revenge that the title promises isn't there except in theory and Freddy functions more as a doppelganger of protagonist Jesse (see Point D)

Point B: In terms of popularity and critical marks (from both professionals and fans alike), Freddy's Revenge ranks somewhere in the middle, and after reviewing the first seven installments earlier this year, I would have to agree with that. What falls under part two? Five and six both. The Dream Master aims to be gothic and tragic but misses its mark on both counts and Freddy's Dead comes across as nothing more than an early ‘90s time capsule back when 3-D (remember that wacky gimmick?) was making one of its cyclical returns. There is a quite funny Johnny Depp cameo, a young Breckin Meyer, an out of place Yapphet Kotto, and not much else.

Point C: After the fleeting but extreme violence in the first Nightmare and its scores of unsettling images (the thought of insects falling out of dead Tina's mouth still gives me the heebie jeebies), the natural presumption would be that Freddy's Revenge would accept the challenge and give us double the violence; new, even more creative dream kills; and a much, much higher body count. Recall that Friday the 13th Part Two had oodles of nastiness (much of it inspired by the seminal Italian horror film/slasher progenitor Twitch of the Death Nerve), including couple impaled by spear while lovemaking and ice pick to brain. Halloween II featured death by scalding in ultra-hot hospital whirlpool and - my personal favorite - young intern slipping on blood dripping from a shunt and hitting his head on the floor.

Continued:       1       2       3       4