The trailer for "A Nightmare on Elm Street" gives every horror movie fan exactly what he or she is looking for. The adept viewer may even recognize Jackie Earle Haley's raspy voice as the menacing Freddy Krueger and remember his creepy−but−cool performance as Rorschach in the film "Watchmen" (2009). Haley's distinctive growl on a brutal snatch of dialogue — "Why are you screaming? I haven't even cut you yet" — allowed even the most diehard horror fan to think this remake would have the potential to revitalize a franchise worn down by countless generic and forgettable sequels.
Unfortunately, the 2010 version of "A Nightmare on Elm Street" (the original was released in 1984) works much better in trailer form than as a full−length feature. Director Samuel Bayer and producer Michael Bay prove once again that in their minds, slick direction and special effects replace inspired cinematic vision, making this "Elm Street" a by−the−numbers, underwhelming remake that will be better known for the potential it squandered than for its few merits.
"A Nightmare on Elm Street" stays true to the original film's plot, a tale that is beautiful in its simplicity. The children who live on Elm Street in Springwood, Ohio, are having nightmares about a burned man in a red−and−green striped sweater and a glove with knives for fingers. Several of the teens believe that these dreams are responsible for the apparent suicide of one of their friends, Dean Russell (Kellan Lutz).
As the movie progresses, the children discover that the man in their nightmares is Freddy Krueger, a former child abuser who terrorized them in preschool and who has returned from the grave to avenge his death, which was at the hands of the children's parents. As the body count rises, Nancy Holbrook (Rooney Mara) and Quentin O'Grady (Kyle Gallner) must find a way to stop Freddy before their insomnia and hallucinations allow him into their waking world.
The original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" had advantages over similar horror franchises like "Friday the 13th" (1980) and "Halloween" (1978). Freddy Krueger has the potential to truly strike fear into the minds of audiences because he taps into a primal fear of all humans: that of nightmares, in which there are no rules. And perhaps most importantly, people can't outrun their nightmares. Sooner or later, everyone must sleep.
Unfortunately, Bayer horribly fails to exploit the psychological effect of nightmares. The film makes a point, divergent to the original film, that after staying awake for more than 70 hours, human beings begin to experience "micronaps," which are essentially waking dreams. This adds an intriguing race against the clock that the original film lacked. However, Bayer falls short in portraying these hallucinations. The film never disorients the audience, nor does it inspire viewers to question what is real. Even with more visually stunning special effects, the remake fails to capture the paranoia and psychological strain of the original film.
The acting in "Elm Street" is hardly worth mentioning. The characters killed off early in the film are essentially walking pieces of scenery, though they are nice to look at. Lutz and Gallner do decent jobs with their characters, and Haley delivers a creepy performance as Krueger. But the acting, while certainly not strong, is not the film's biggest problem.
The overall effect is not of "Elm Street" being a bad movie. It is simply perfectly average and completely forgettable. Baley and Bay — who also produced the horrible "Friday the 13th" (2009) remake — seem to not understand the difference between a movie that startles and a movie that scares.
Anyone can make a movie that is startling. It's as simple as having a character jump on screen at the same time as cymbal crash on the musical score. But it takes a vision, and inspired directing, to make a film scary.
