Friday, October 2, 2015
A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985) review
Compared to its legendary predecessor, the first sequel to Wes Craven's memorable franchise is quite terrible. Everything is a major fall from the first film. Most of the performances are very hollow and inexperienced, the mechanics of the movie are very ridiculous, and instead of scares, we have unintentional laughs. In comparison to the first, A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls into so-bad-it's-good territory, and is in no way a worthy addition to Craven's horror canon.
PLOT: After his family moves into the old house on Elm Street, young and awkward Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton) starts to have terrifying dreams of former serial killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund). Even more terrifying than that is the fact that Freddy wants to recruit Jesse as a type of apprentice. Though Jesse doesn't want anything to do with it, he finds out over time that he can't control his decision to kill, for Freddy's begun to control him. With only the support of his best friend, Ron Grady (Robert Russler) and his girlfriend, Lisa Webber (Kim Myers), Jesse must fight his urge to kill and get rid of Freddy for good. The plot sounds like a good idea, but ends up just being preposterous. There's no boundaries between dreams and real life in this Krueger movie; Freddy attacks and effects the scenery almost everywhere, not limiting to dreams anymore. This throws off the whole concept of the movie and pretty much ruins the movie and makes it confusing. The plot is overly ridiculous and preposterously executed.
ACTING: The performances were not so great in this Freddy "film". The only performance that showed a spark of effort was, of course, Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger. Englund stays true to the attitude of his character. No one else in this movie even showed a hint of experience. Mark Patton is almost completely unfitting for the part of Jesse and Kim Myers is actually as wooden as a tree. Had this cast had a bit of experience, this movie may have had a bit more potential.
SCORE: The score is really nothing special and fantastic in this one. It enhanced the few moments of unease, but it wasn't anything truly significant.
EFFECTS: The effects in this Nightmare movie are hit and miss with most being misses. The strange part is that the effects in the movie seemed to slowly deteriorate from decent to terrible and cheap. The blood is still true, but the means of killing and the more grotesque scenes are just plain cheap. It feels like they squandered every dollar they had on everything else, unsuccessfully, and settled for cheap props and visual effects.
OTHER CONTENT: The only good things about this sad attempt at accompanying a classic are the hilarious one-liners and the unintentional humor. This movie is funny in places it shouldn't be. It takes itself too seriously for what it really is, which is a simple attempt at milking a franchise too early. However, the actually funny one-liners help save the movie from sinking into complete stupidity. In every other aspect, however, this movie fails. Had Craven been in the director's chair this round, Nightmare 2: Freddy's Revenge would have been an excellent addition to the franchise.
Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls far from the original classic its concept came from. Except for Englund, none of the performances were worth anybody's time. The special effects aren't so special and the main idea is shattered in a preposterous change in plot mechanics. This whole movie is a horror experiment gone wrong. As a matter of fact, I'd call it the true "nightmare" after falling so far from the classic predecessor's quailty.