Nightmare on Elm Street Remake - A dream come true?

[Angel]

So apparently, they really are remaking it. I still think this movie is a bit young to be remaking. But here's the thing; Michael Bay is directing, and Jackie Earle Haley (aka Rorschach) is playing Freddy Krueger.

...

Maybe things will be okay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-tSvrkKx2Y

[Dannysaysnoo]

I'll probably wait for the reviews and opinions to bowl me over. And I don't think Bay is directing, I thought he was on the production team?

[Mao]

I'm willing to give it a try.  When I was young that movie scared the crap out of me, and I loved it for that.  So, even if it turns out sucking, the nostalgia alone will make it worth my dollar.

[Keleth]

It is a Michael Bay movie, so he'll have a terminator reference in there somewhere.

Also, random explosions, Freddy will be toting a rocket launcher kids!

[Dannysaysnoo]

Also, random explosions, Freddy will be toting a rocket launcher kids!

Freddy's second glove has nuclear warheads for fingers.

[ShadesFox]

Don't forget the giant monster that comes from under the desert to eat all of your sand.

It could be interesting, but I'll reserve judgement.  Not sure how Bay will do on the scary front.

[superluser]

I wonder what excuse Bay will provide for having the children asleep an hour before sunset.

[Alondro]

Don't forget the giant monster that comes from under the desert to eat all of your sand.

Noez!  Not my sand!  I NEED it!   

[Vidar]

I wish they thought of something new and interesting. The 21st century has already seen too many remakes.

[Corgatha Taldorthar]

I wish they thought of something new and interesting. The 21st century has already seen too many remakes.

But that would require qualities like intelligence, creativity, a willingess to take risks.

Most of hollywood seems to prefer the "throw huge gobs of money at it" school of filmmaking these days.

[Alondro]

Most of hollywood seems to prefer the "throw huge gobs of money at it" school of filmmaking these days.

Not to mention that, despite what they believe and reassure each other is true, most of the Hollow-wood denizens are morons.

As proof, I note the elevated incidence of PETA sympathizers and Scientologists in the Hollywood crowd vs the general population.   

[Netrogo]

Not to mention that, despite what they believe and reassure each other is true, most of the Hollow-wood denizens are morons.

As proof, I note the elevated incidence of PETA sympathizers and Scientologists in the Hollywood crowd vs the general population.   

That's actually not so much an idiocy thing, on their part, as it is an understanding of public idiocy. Nothing says good publicity like lovin da bebe aminals or doing anything with Tom Cruise. Seriously, find Tom Cruise, jump him in the street and rape him up the butt. You'll be hated the next morning, a public curiousity by the end of the week, a guest on a random tv show by the end of the month, in a random small part in a film within six months, then co-starring along side Tom Cruise (who by now has forgiven the whole 'incident') by the year's end.

There's no such thing as bad publicity.

[Vidar]

I wish they thought of something new and interesting. The 21st century has already seen too many remakes.

But that would require qualities like intelligence, creativity, a willingess to take risks.

Most of hollywood seems to prefer the "throw huge gobs of money at it" school of filmmaking these days.

I noticed. It's why I almost never watch movies anymore.
It's really quite an interesting phenomenon. Hollywood can create any and every special effect there is using computers, and they can't do anything creative with them, and around half a century ago, when film was still in black and white and special effects where crude at best, the Japanese managed to make masterpieces like "the Seven Samurai", "Yojimbo", "Sanjuro", "Rashomon".
It seems that in nearly all creative endeavors, "more" does not equal "better".

[Angel]

I wish they thought of something new and interesting. The 21st century has already seen too many remakes.

I'm nott too happy about the idea of a remake myself, but at least this one looks like it's staying faithful enough to the original while still adding its own spin. I mean, the only real Bay-style effect I saw in the trailer was the house blowing up. And of course, it's nice to see that at least they aren't milking the sequels anymore.

But it's hard to come up with new and interesting horror movies without someone accusing you of ripping off another's work. Hell, when I saw previews for "The Grudge" in English, I thought it was a ripoff of "The Ring", and was proven wrong in both a delightful and terrifying way.

I do agree that old movies with far less effects have done better than the new shiny ones. (Star Wars series, anyone?) But as long as Hollywood is at least acknowledging that a remake is a remake, they're still doing better than if they said it was something all new.