Like so many of its contemporaries, Wes Craven's original fantasy slasher film has way too many sequels, and quite a few were simply churned out without enough creativity or imagination behind them. Which is odd considering the premise. It's a series set in a world where anything you can dream up is possible! And yet they rehash ideas way too often, usually looking to capitalize on the popularity of certain elements without sticking to the established rules and lore. But let's go deeper and see what exactly the issues are and how all of this holds up as a franchise. A lot of fans cite the third and seventh instalments as where the peaks in quality lie, so it's time to see why the entries in between are remembered less fondly. The man of your dreams is waiting...
The first and best movie in this series, 1984's A Nightmare on Elm Street is jam packed with set pieces and memorable moments that overshadow any minor complaints I might have. The finale is pretty dumb with a series of weird Home Alone traps being set for some reason, though there is some charm to it. One of the early dream sequences is also a bit strange with a stretchy armed first appearance from Freddy Krueger being less than effective, as if the puppetry didn't quite work out and they had to go with it. But it's still all very memorable.
The acting isn't stellar, but for a movie like this there's enough likeable characters to carry it. As everyone knows this the first appearance of Johnny Depp, but there's also a good turn from genre regular John Saxon who is clearly the best thing here. His later appearances in two of the sequels always add appeal whether they give him a good amount of screen time or not. Heather Langenkamp as the protagonist Nancy is less effective but she does a fair job and is a likeable lead, again adding appeal to her later appearances.
The story rests on that instantly engaging plot device of staying awake or a killer will get you. The whole 'am I dreaming or not' idea alone adds so much unease to everything going on. Robert Englund as razor clawed murderer Freddy (or just Fred as he is here) is often kept in the shadows, to great effect. His make-up looks a bit rough but I think it works better than in later instalments when it was shown too much and started to look like a simple appliance or a mask. The plot about the kids trying to fight off the spirit of vengeance set on them by their own parents also adds an atmosphere of isolation, building on the usual 'adults don't believe in monsters' idea.
The film itself is a great ride thanks to all the little horror beats, with the body bag, the trick phone, the blood geyser, the bath time nightmare among many others... it's all pretty great. The score by Charles Bernstein has a great piano and synth feel to it with a theme tune that isn't as iconic as say Halloween, but it has lots of personality and is a great addition to period horror music. Dropping it for part two was a big mistake (amongst other things) and they always brought it back later, presumably after realising this.
The sequels had to jump through plenty of hoops trying to figure out ways not only to outdo this stuff but also how to get around that shock ending - Wes Craven never intended this to have a follow up. But of course, they had to to make another movie or six anyway. It's a slasher story where almost anything goes because of the fantastical premise... how hard could it be?
As titles go, Freddy's Revenge has to be one of the most redundant (we'll get into part six later). Wasn't the whole point of the original film revenge? Not only is this a silly thing to call it, but they didn't even write a story that continues the original plot - so the whole thing about him getting back at the parents of the Elm Street children is completely missing. He doesn't even get revenge against Nancy after being defeated either, even if that was left without a concrete resolution. So this one is a bit of a mess to say the least. The resulting movie feels like a haunted house story or something from another series about poltergeists and demonic possession. The traditional score feels very out of place adding to this odd mood.
Sure in his own way Freddy was a ghost of sorts, but the whole point was that his power came from dreams and they affected things in the real world that way. This time he wants to escape that limbo by taking over the body of Jesse, a boy who moved into Nancy's empty house. And he's going to mess around with a lot of house hold appliances and along the way. Things start out weird, with our hero having dreams about meeting the man with the finger knives even though he isn't related to the original team of vigilantes at all... and it gets stranger from there on out. Of all the movies this is the one that had me raising eyebrows the most and questioning what was going on at every stage.
Freddy can not only make this guy do his bidding, but now he affects objects in the real world and people who are not even asleep. There are also some oddly homoerotic moments as many fans will know. The inclusion of a sadistic school teacher who is stripped by possessed gym equipment stands out as the strangest element. As a real theme in a teen puberty drama idea this might actually work. But everything is such a weird shambolic mess than any sense of purpose is lost. Why even have dream powers when all this is possible? It's almost like this was part of another script and it was later repurposed.
The revenge part adds up to a big nothing with Freddy finally appearing during a pool party and flipping over a few tables and a barbecue. What a villain! There are actually some neat special effects sequences as he starts to morph into reality although his face is now all weird a puffy looking. It's mired under all this other stuff in a story that includes demonic cats and and ending where Freddy is vanquished by the power of love. At least I think that's what happens. There are so many perplexing moments that it's almost likeable, but only almost. Ironically while this is the last film in the series without any goofy one liners it can only be viewed as a comedy. Things have to pick up in the next one right?
Part three has a strong fan following and it's easy to see why. Dream Warriors has a lot of memorable stuff much like the original, along with a twist on the premise that works well. It's almost as if Wes Craven actually knew what he was doing and returned to get it back on track. The fantasy ideas are pushed further but it also manages to go back to the original story enough to make it all work, resulting in the best of the sequels. It's visually interesting and has better characters, including a young 'Larry' Fishburne and the return of Heather Langenkamp and John Saxon.
I do have to question just how many of the Elm Street kids are left though. Sure it makes sense to go back to them as a target but how many were there? Freddy was supposed to have killed around twenty children in the original backstory, did every parent in town have an equal hand in the vigilante action and the cover up? How many live on Elm Street and why didn't Freddy try killing the children in their dreams last time? What was he even doing up until now? But it's okay, it all works out for the best with the last few being held in a hospital suffering with mental issues as a result of their nightmares. Nancy is back to help them, almost like they planned this out like a real movie.
It does set up a few unfortunate elements that would get repeated far too often in the subsequent movies. The biggest mistake is the way that Nancy's house is now Freddy's house, which doesn't make sense. As the audience we know it of course, but now it's taken on importance within the story although nobody is living there this time. There's also more of Freddy using powers in the real world, a strange carry over from part two. Don't get me wrong the stop motion here is really great but it again begs the question of why he needs the whole nightmare thing at all. He's also gained power from the souls of his victims for some reason, making him an unholy monster - the son of a thousand maniacs - which seems a bit much.
The later movies would latch onto this storyline way too often, repeating these ideas until they're warped into bigger dumber ones. But here at least overall the tone works, and things fit together a lot better than in the second movie which was often just headache inducing. The dream elements are far stronger too with the bizarre snake monster and the hypodermic needle finger scene standing out. The idea of the kids becoming "warriors" comes a bit late in the story which is a shame and some of the characters don't get much to do, but at least this all has a lot of personality. They get the theme tune back, and it feels like a real sequel. Even if Freddy's dialogue is starting to become cartoonish overall this is a fun time. It's good while it lasts.
(PART TWO>>)
