Skip to main content

Give daddy the glove back, princess.

Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare

(SPOILERS) Looking at Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare, by some distance the least lauded (and laudable) of the original Elm Street sextet, you’d think it inconceivable that novice director and series old-hand – first as assistant production manager and finally as producer – Rachel Talalay has since become a respected and in-demand TV helmer. For the most part, Freddy’s Dead is shockingly badly put together. It reminded me of the approach the likes of Chris Carter and Sir Ken take, where someone has clearly been around productions, absorbing the basics of direction, but has zero acumen for turning that into a competent motion picture, be it composition, scene construction, editing or pacing. Talalay’s also responsible for the story idea here, which does offer a few nuggets, at least, but her more primary role actively defeats any positives.

To be honest, having seen her contributions to Capaldi-era nu-Who season finales, I’m not altogether convinced Talalay has come on in leaps and bounds since either, but she’s at least competent there. Her work on Freddy’s Dead, having convinced Bob Shaye she was the man for the job (she had to contend with sexist suggestions that she was going to girly it up), is comparable to similar instances where one is baffled a supposedly competent exec would take a chance on a first timer, entrusting them with the keys to a kingdom (be that David Goyer and Blade: Trinity or Mark Steven Johnson and Daredevil/Ghostrider). One is inclined to conclude nothing short of blackmail would induce such a decision.

The shame of it is, I could see Freddy’s Dead having been the series’ best since Dream Warriors. Freddy here is at his most eloquent – if you want to call it that – and his history is further explored in a manner that doesn’t feel too like retconning (even if it leads one to wonder just how many more previously unmined pockets of his past would have been unearthed, had the series continued). Many of the set-up gags work too – this is Freddy at his most cartoonish, outside of The Dream Master, and with it comes Englund’s most cartoonish mask – but the execution is generally awful, and Talalay’s ability to pull off the dream deaths is sorely lacking.

It was a fine idea to have his nightmarish endeavours accompanied by a riff on Night on Bear Mountain, and having him ride a broomstick à la The Wizard of Oz was probably inevitable (wicked witch Freddy: he bears the facial characteristics of your typical old crone, after all). But Talalay repeatedly shows zero sense of timing, whether it’s delivering gags, shocks, reveals or deaths.

The glove down a blackboard made me laugh, admittedly, but kills such as deaf kid Ricky Dean Logan’s head exploding, or Shon Greenblatt landing on a bed of spikes (after plummeting from the skies), or Breckin Meyer sucked into a computer game, fall flat (“Great graphics!”– no they’re lousy, bearing scant resemblance to game graphics and looking entirely like ultra-cheap animation). This, despite Talalay clearly having a commendably Looney Tunes, Wylie Coyote intent behind such sequences. She favours the use of handheld camera, but it suggests amateurishness rather than immediacy or audacity.

Talalay was further inspired in her comedic Freddy quest by her involvement with John Waters on Cry Baby, and specifically his penchant for celebrity cameos. Hence the appearances of Roseanne Barr, Tom Arnold, Alice Cooper (as Freddy’s foster father) and Johnny Depp. Who, rather ironically, given his form over the past half-decade or so, appears in a brief Young Ones-esque spoof infomercial (“This is you on drugs”). None of these really land, although they’re sound enough on paper.

Further misjudgements include the dreadful Goo Goo Dolls RAWK opening track, the “cute” Nietzsche quote followed by a Freddy quote, and the directive to include the 3D gimmick in the narrative for the last ten minutes. Admittedly, the last one isn’t Talalay’s fault, but inserted in such an egregious manner – Lisa Zane is instructed to don a pair of 3D specs – it’s pretty unforgivable. Aesthetically then, Freddy’s Dead is a disaster, with a series known for employing directors with at least some creative spark settling for someone with none whatsoever (Talalay would compound this with Tank Girl – again, she had a slew of decent ideas on how to approach the movie, but negligible ability to realise them).

Talalay cited some laudable influences including Carnival of Souls and Twin Peaks. At one point, a character comments “We’re in Twin Peaks here” – well, if only. She had Michael De Luca on screenplay duties, who’d ascend to New Line production head a few years later, and would also furnish the (very good) script for In the Mouth of Madness. And the (not so good) Sly Judge Dredd, so let’s not get carried away (he also performed a rewrite on The Dream Child). But there are some good ideas in Freddy’s Dead.

And some curious ones. Michael Almereyda’s original draft featured Alice’s teenage son, and this appears to be where the story’s time jump came from, and also the John Doe character (Greenblatt). The latter was intended as a shock death, presumably as per here, where it’s much less so because Greenblatt is such a non-presence.

None of the kids are up to much, though. Meyer obviously went on to greater fame, but his character is merely a purpose-fit stoner, most notable for being required to march in a jerky video game manner. As realised here, John Doe also has a character arc remarkably similar to Ryan Gosling in Blade Runner 2049, convinced he’s an all-important chosen one (“Freddy won’t hurt me. I’m family”) only to discover he isn’t (“Oh, do you think I’m your daddy?”)

Zane is instead revealed as Freddy’s daughter (pretty clear if you watch the trailer first), and given the time frame – ten years on, so logically 2001, although official lore has apparently reframed it as 1999 – she must be in her forties (Zane was thirty when the movie came out). Zane is fine, and believably genetically related to Englund, but again, the material is dealt short shrift under Talalay’s undifferentiated gaze.

The picture’s opening on a plane might be argued as predictive if that 2001 date is retained (the movie was released on September 13 1991, rather than 11), particularly since the plane event turns out to be a deranged manipulation. It seems Freddy’s actual death was 1968 (so adding to the Manson era-esque flavour), with Katherine Krueger taken from him in 1966. The Welcome! To Freddy 101 offers “In 1493 Freddy sailed across the sea”, and the curious “1945 – Hiroshima and Nagasaki attempts fail” (as in, they were actually just another slice of false history?)

There’s also some tantalising ancient lore, courtesy of the welcome presence of Yaphet Kotto – he faced Roger Moore, the Xenomorph and now Kreuger – as Doc. He references “ancient dream demons” who “turn your own nightmares into reality” and Freddy later mentions “The dream people. The ones who gave me this job”. That in itself suggests an astral layer ripe for further exploration, just not in a series that habitually resorts to the lowest common denominator.

There’s also a fair amount of playing fast and loose. Dragging Freddy into the real world to kill him goes full circle to the original Elm Street, but Freddy is also referenced as “fucking with the line between dreams and reality”, whereby he didn’t just kill the teens here, “he erased them”.

Talalay expressed disappointment with the straightjacket of 3D and the lack of invention in Freddy’s demise, but the last twenty to thirty minutes are ironically the most visually coherent in the picture. It seems New Line basically drew a line under Freddy because they – rightly, what with the cash cowabunga of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles – felt they could survive without him. There’d still be a last gasp, though (well, two, I guess). But if Wes Craven’s return represented a much surer hand at the tiller, the ideas would still eclipse the execution.

Popular posts from this blog

This risotto is shmackin’, dude.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 1 (SPOILERS) I haven’t had cause, or the urge, to revisit earlier seasons of Stranger Things , but I’m fairly certain my (relatively) positive takes on the first two sequel seasons would adjust down somewhat if I did (a Soviet base under Hawkins? DUMB soft disclosure or not, it’s pretty dumb). In my Season Three review, I called the show “ Netflix’s best-packaged junk food. It knows not to outstay its welcome, doesn’t cause bloat and is disposable in mostly good ways ” I fairly certain the Duffer’s weren’t reading, but it’s as if they decided, as a rebuke, that bloat was the only way to go for Season Four. Hence episodes approaching (or exceeding) twice the standard length. So while the other points – that it wouldn’t stray from its cosy identity and seasons tend to merge in the memory – hold fast, you can feel the ambition of an expansive canvas faltering at the hurdle of Stranger Things ’ essential, curated, nostalgia-appeal inconsequentiality.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

Is this supposed to be me? It’s grotesque.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2022) (SPOILERS) I didn’t hold out much hope for The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent being more than moderately tolerable. Not so much because its relatively untested director and his co-writer are mostly known in the TV sphere (and not so much for anything anyone is raving about). Although, it has to be admitted, the finished movie flourishes a degree of digital flatness typical of small-screen productions (it’s fine, but nothing more). Rather, due to the already over-tapped meta-strain of celebs showing they’re good sports about themselves. When Spike Jonze did it with John Malkovich, it was weird and different. By the time we had JCVD , not so much. And both of them are pre-dated by Arnie in Last Action Hero (“ You brought me nothing but pain ” he is told by Jack Slater). Plus, it isn’t as if Tom Gormican and Kevin Etten have much in the way of an angle on Nic; the movie’s basically there to glorify “him”, give or take a few foibles, do

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

Witness (1985) (SPOILERS) Witness saw the advent of a relatively brief period – just over half a decade –during which Harrison Ford was willing to use his star power in an attempt to branch out. The results were mixed, and abruptly concluded when his typically too late to go where Daniel Day Lewis, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro had gone before (with at bare minimum Oscar-nominated results) – but not “ full retard ” – ended in derision with Regarding Henry . He retreated to the world of Tom Clancy, and it’s the point where his cachet began to crumble. There had always been a stolid quality beneath even his more colourful characters, but now it came to the fore. You can see something of that as John Book in Witness – despite his sole Oscar nom, it might be one of Ford’s least interesting performances of the 80s – but it scarcely matters, or that the screenplay (which won) is by turns nostalgic, reactionary, wistful and formulaic, as director Peter Weir, in his Hollywood debu

The Illumi-what-i?

Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) (SPOILERS) In which Sam Raimi proves that he can stand proudly with the best – or worst – of them as a good little foot soldier of the woke apocalypse. You’d expect the wilfully anarchic – and Republican – Raimi to choke on the woke, but instead, he’s sucked it up, grinned and bore it. Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is so slavishly a production-line Marvel movie, both in plotting and character, and in nu-Feige progressive sensibilities, there was no chance of Sam staggering out from beneath its suffocating demands with anything more than a few scraps of stylistic flourish intact.

If that small woman is small enough, she could fit behind a small tree.

Stranger Things Season 4: Volume 2 (SPOILERS) I can’t quite find it within myself to perform the rapturous somersaults that seem to be the prevailing response to this fourth run of the show. I’ve outlined some of my thematic issues in the Volume 1 review, largely borne out here, but the greater concern is one I’ve held since Season Two began – and this is the best run since Season One, at least as far my failing memory can account for – and that’s the purpose-built formula dictated by the Duffer Brothers. It’s there in each new Big Bad, obviously, even to the extent that this is the Big-Bad-who-binds-them-all (except the Upside Down was always there, right?) And it’s there with the resurgent emotional beats, partings, reunions and plaintively stirring music cues. I have to be really on board with a movie or show to embrace such flagrantly shameless manipulation, season after season, and I find myself increasingly immune.

Get away from my burro!

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) (SPOILERS) The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is beloved by so many of the cinematic firmament’s luminaries – Stanley Kubrick, Sam Raimi, , Paul Thomas Anderson and who knows maybe also WS, Vince Gilligan, Spike Lee, Daniel Day Lewis; Oliver Stone was going to remake it – not to mention those anteriorly influential Stone Roses, that it seems foolhardy to suggest it isn’t quite all that. There’s no faulting the performances – a career best Humphrey Bogart, with director John Huston’s dad Walter stealing the movie from under him – but the greed-is-bad theme is laid on a little thick, just in case you were a bit too dim to get it yourself the first time, and Huston’s direction may be right there were it counts for the dramatics, but it’s a little too relaxed when it comes to showing the seams between Mexican location and studio.

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls… dyin’ time’s here!

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) Time was kind to Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome . As in, it was such a long time since I’d seen the “final chapter” of the trilogy, it had dwindled in my memory to the status of an “alright but not great” sequel. I’d half-expected to have positive things to say along the lines of it being misunderstood, or being able to see what it was trying for but perhaps failing to quite achieve. Instead, I re-discovered a massive turkey that is really a Mad Max movie in name only (appropriately, since Max was an afterthought). This is the kind of picture fans of beloved series tend to loathe; when a favourite character returns but without the qualities or tone that made them adored in the first place (see Indiana Jones in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull , or John McClane in the last two Die Hard s). Thunderdome stinks even more than the methane fuelling Bartertown. I hadn’t been aware of the origins of Thunderdome until recently, mainly because I was