Some thoughts on Wes Craven's New Nightmare

As you can tell, this blog is going to be an eclectic mix of personal journaling, theological tangents and random reflections on pop culture. I am an active member of the Friday the 13th message board, and there was a recent discussion concerning Wes Craven's New Nightmare (here on in referred to as WCNN). This is a film that divides fans of the series more than any other. Some praise it because it is attempting to take the series in a new direction, while others lament it for ruining the icon they have come to worship.

Personally, I find WCNN to be a magnum opus of a picture. Wes Craven returned to true form after making a string of critical and box failures, including Shocker and The People Under the Stairs. It is also important to bear in mind that WCNN was made before Scream, the film that put him back on the map from a box office standpoint. While WCNN was a box office failure, I believe this was the film that re-earned Wes a coveted spot as a "Master of Horror."

With WCNN, Craven uses his background in mythology to once again craft an ingenious story. Craven wants his audience to believe that Freddy Krueger is really a demon that has manifested itself in the form of the horror icon. With no NoES films in production, the demon has been released from the confines of celluloid and allowed to seep through into the real world. It's an extremely self-referential movie without having all the tongue-in-cheekiness of Scream.

As a first time viewing, the film is brilliant. Even the trailers for this were extremely misleading. They were very vague and hinted that something real or even documentary like was occurring. It ties in so beautifully with the original NoES, because it has that lucid, dreamlike quality to it. What's real? What's not?

The film opens on the production set of a movie. This movie appears to be a new Nightmare on Elm Street film (here on in referred to as NoES). Suddenly, the mechanical Freddy glove springs to life on its own accord and begins attacking crew members. Heather Lagenkamp then awakens from her nightmare. Craven demonstrates once again that he knows how to effectively manipulate an audience. The viewers are left in a very lucid and slightly disjointed state: the beginning was a dream? Is Heather Lagenkamp going to be Nancy or is she herself? We have, in essence, achieved exactly what Craven set out: we have entered a dream state of semi-awareness.

As if this wasn't enough to jolt us, an earthquake suddenly rips through. As a reminder of itself, it leaves cracks in the walls that suspiciously resemble claw marks. I have always viewed the earthquake in the beginning as the evil of the demon being unleashed. It is a very interesting concept that dreaming about Freddy, or in this case, the demon, is what gives him/it its power. Through Heather's dream, she is able to summon the demon into the real world. The claw marks in the wall help to support this. However, we as viewers aren't aware of this at this time. All we know is that it's an extremely foreboding warning that something bad is going to occur, we just aren't exactly sure what.

To further lend credibility to his script, Craven asked his cast members if he would be allowed to incorporate autobiographical elements into the script. We learn that Heather Lagenkamp is actually herself, which makes the audience feel like voyeurs intruding on her world. Heather really is married to a special effects artist in real life and she really did have a stalker. The stalker element will be used to chilling effect throughout the film, but I will save that for a little later.

Heather and her husband have a young son named Dylan. In a nice touch of dark humor, we are introduced to Dylan in pajamas. Heather chastises her son for playing with his food, and it's then we are garnered another hint that something is quite amiss. Dylan has formed a "Freddy face" in his cereal. Does Dylan know about his mom's movies? Is it merely a trick of the eye, a mere coincidence? Heather doesn't seem to notice it so why should we? Again, we are being manipulated as viewers. I believe that Dylan's "Freddy face" in the cereal again attests to the power of the demon. Demons are able to possess people, and we see this gradually happen to Dylan throughout the film. What is supposed to be harmless, normal activity for a child (playing with his food) instead is the signal of something evil.

Heather's husband leaves for the set of the latest movie he is working on. Heather feels reluctant about her husband leaving and even attempts to run after him. The phone rings, and she rushes to it, hoping it may be him. Instead, it is the voice of who Heather believes to be her stalker. Demons are also know for their abilities to possess knowledge about people. The demon would therefore have known about Heather's stalker. It decided to taunt her and terrify her, in effect, giving itself even more power. Perhaps the demon truly has been her stalker all along?

It's the tenth anniversary of the NoES series, and Heather is scheduled to reunite with Robert Englund on a talk show. Heather is very visibly nervous as Robert comes out not as himself, but as Freddy. Once she realizes it is him, she calms down and laughs, but there is still a lingering sense of tension about the whole scene. Perhaps my favorite shot in the whole film is when Robert as Freddy is waving his hands in the air to his adoring fans. There is a cult worship to him, and the demon thrives off it. It's also very crucifixion like: Robert has surrendered himself completely to Freddy, and in essence, to the demon.

Wes mentions on the audio commentary for NN that Robert himself is actually being possessed by this demon as well. That's why he paints the picture that looks a lot like our favorite claw wearing villian. This would make sense as to why his screen time is so limited, it's actually a brilliant twist in a way. The very thing that Robert has been on film is now literally trying to take over his life. Not only that, but it's clear that Wes was trying to present this as a mockumentary. In doing this, he needed to convince his audience that Robert Englund was just an actor and that this real demon was running around. If Englund would have had too much screen time, the audience would have been identifying him with Krueger. The film would probably not worked so well as a result.

Heather is informed that Wes wants to meet with her in regards to a new NoES film he is planning. Wes tells Heather that he needs her to play Nancy one last time. He says he has been having trouble sleeping and his insomnia has produced the script. Heather is confused by all of this and says she has to think it over.

Heather's husband falls asleep at the wheel on his way to race home after Heather informs him that her stalker has returned. He is slashed repeatedly by the very mechanical glove that Heather had dreamed about. Grief stricken, Heather turns to John Saxon, her father from the original NoES as a literal father figure. Dylan's behavior becomes increasingly strange, but everybody tries to chalk it up to grief over his father. In fact, everyone's behavior is being more and more erratic. The nurses suspect Heather is on drugs, Dylan is sleepwalking and Robert is becoming more and more consumed by Krueger. It's also a nice touch on how being known for one sole role can take a toll on a person after time.

Earthquakes begin appearing with more and more frequency, an indicator that the demon is near. Heather goes to open her closet and finds the demon in Freddy form. It attacks her and then whispers "Nancy" before disapearing. Heather than races to the hospital where Dylan has been committed to save him.

The climatic moment comes when Dylan has escaped from the hospital and has returned home. Heather frantically calls John and begs him to help her. While at her house, John refers to her as Nancy. Heather demands to know why John has called her Nancy, to which he replies "Why are you calling me John?" As he goes to get in his car, Heather finally realizes what she must do. She has to become Nancy. It is Nancy that recognizes the demon as the form it manifested in, and that is Freddy. It was Nancy that had the courage to turn her back from Freddy and yet it was Heather that had to have the courage to play Nancy. To give a name to something allows a person to have control over it. When the demon is lurking over Heather and saying "Nancy", this is exactly what he has done. It is Nancy he believes he has control over. Also, the moment Heather accepts being Nancy, the two souls are now fused together in a way. The demon believes it can claim two souls, so why wouldn't it wait for her acceptance?

With this acceptance, John has now morphed into Nancy's father. He tells her, "I love you pumpkin," to which she responds, "I love you too....daddy." With this, she is now clothed in pajamas and her house is now 1428 Elm Street. The demon arises from the bed, cocooned within sheets. It reveals itself as Freddy.

Heather/Nancy takes some sleeping pills that Dylan has left for her and enters the depths of the demon's hell. Snake imagery figures very prominently during these last scenes to great effect. Dylan's innocence, like those of Adam and Eve, has been lost at the hands of this demon. Heather/Nancy is able to slay the demon and things appear to return as they once were. Heather sees a script on the floor and flips to the end, "Heather, thanks for playing Nancy one last time-Wes."

I can understand why reaction to this was so hostile. By 1994, fans of NoES had expected a certain formula: Freddy would make some wise cracks and then dismember and kill his teenage targets in various clever ways. WCNN turned this formula on its heels. This was a very dark and serious film, perhaps even more so than the original NoES. Freddy as the demon still has his humor, but now it is chilling instead of being cheesy. The demon asks Dylan "Hey kid, ever play skin the cat?" as he drags Dylan's babysitter across the ceiling in a bloody fashion (which is also a nice homage to Tina's murder in NoES).

The appearance of Freddy also pissed off a lot of fans. This Freddy sports a claw that is actually fused into his hand, instead of being a metal glove. He also sports what has been dubbed "Gap Freddy" by the haters in that he wears a leather trench coat and long black boots. I am rather fond of this Freddy though, as the face is simply evil at its finest.

I think ultimately people were just confused. They weren't sure what this movie was attempting to be. I believe the downfall is how ahead of its time it was. Now, with films like Scream, there is a movie-within-a-movie awareness, but at the time of WCNN, this was unheard of.

It's not at all a strict sequel. Rather, it is Craven's omega to his alpha. It is his way of finally killing the very thing he created, and he did a brilliant job in doing so.

Oh Halloween, how far you have fallen

I tried really hard to be open-minded about the Halloween remake. I realized after Busta Rhymes uttered "Trick or Treat, Motherfucker!" in Halloween: Resurrection, that the franchise as I knew and loved it was dead. I understood that Halloween was going to have to go in a different direction if it were to survive, however, after the prequel/remake, I am wishing the series would have went out with a pathetic whimper instead of a violent, nonsensical bang.

From the onset, this doesn't feel like a Halloween movie. There is a quote from Dr. SamuEL Loomis to open the film up with. SamuEL??? I am a bit confused by Zombie's insistence on having Dr. Loomis be referred to as SamuEL ,when in the original he is Dr. Sam Loomis. You may argue that Rob is attempting to differentiate his film from the original and its sequels, but if that is the case, why not use different characters all together then? We get a tiny snippet from the Halloween score, and even it doesn't feel the same. Instead of the simply effective score by Carpenter, we instead get an industrialized one. It's completely over the top, which is appropriate considering that is how the movie plays out.

The film opens with a rock song, which immediately threw me out of the Halloween mood. For all the sequels' flaws, they all managed to open with a really memorable first scene. Halloween 4's opening montage of pumpkins, barns and leaves serves as the best example of this. It sets the tone for the entire rest of the movie. For this opening, we are shown the Myers residence, which smacks of white trash. As if that weren't enough, Zombie treats us to a completely pointless ten minute scene of Michael's mother and her asshole boyfriend bickering back and forth. We get it, Rob. You want your Michael to come from a dysfunctional family as some motivation as to why he kills. That's where your film first displays that this is not even going to hold a candle to the original. Michael's family in the original seems very suburban and well...normal. That's what makes it so startling. For all intense purposes, Michael should be a well-adjusted boy. Instead, for no motivation whatsoever, he snaps. It's chilling and effective. This is just stereotypical.

The original Halloween has truly likable characters. Sure, they are considered standard cliches now, but Halloween was really the first to establish them. You have the virgin, the slut, the bimbo, the asshole jock, etc. However, you still are rooting for them. In Zombie's vision, only one character is even remotely likable, and that is Danny Trejo's guard/janitor/some sort of job in the sanitarium because Zombie doesn't really care about details. Laurie and Loomis, the two characters we are supposed to care about the most, are instead two of the most obnoxious in the film.

A large part of this has to do with the pacing of the film. It's simply trying to squeeze too much into too little screen time. The first thirty to forty minutes consist of back-story. Never in my life did I think I would be able to associate the song Love Hurts with Halloween, but now I can say I can. Michael gets pissed because his mom is too busy stripping and his sister too preoccupied having sex than to take him trick or treating, and this is the catalyst in which he decides to go on a murderous rampage?

Simply put, Michael is a whiny little bitch in this film. When his feelings are hurt or he doesn't get his way, he goes crazy and kills. It seems than even Zombie himself isn't sure why Michael behaves the way he does. There is a scene in the sanitarium in which Michael tells his mother he likes to wear masks because they hide his ugliness. Rob really could have went places with that line, but instead it's just a throwaway.

Zombie decided to also include the later sequels explanation of Laurie being Michael's sister and that being his driving force to pursue her. I have to admit, Rob does have an interesting take on this relationship. Apparently, Michael feels some sort of connection to his baby sister he has dubbed Boo. It seems that Zombie is trying to have Michael kill everyone in the way of reuniting with her. Again, this is a very interesting take, but Rob just doesn't execute it right. Halloween worked so beautifully and frightfully because there was no motivation. We don't know in the original that Laurie is his sister, which makes it all the more terrifying that he is relentlessly pursuing a random target.

This Michael also doesn't feel like the Shape. Instead, he is more like Jason in a decayed William Shatner mask. Zombie's Michael is lumbering and enormous. He slams people against walls with brutal force. He also commits a cardinal sin: he grunts. Instead of the chilling semi-orgasmic breathing, we get a grunting Michael. The Shape is supposed to be a silent stalker. It seems as though Zombie was simply trying to appease hardcore fans of the original, because there are moments when Michael as purely The Shape shine through. For instance, when Bob walks right past him and he doesn't even notice. Or when Michael is standing right behind little Lindsey Wallace and studying her. However, the moments are far too fleeting and Michael's massiveness prevent these scenes from being truly effective.

The Michael of the original is also very cunning and manipulative. Again, there are brief scenes scattered here and there which seem to indicate that Zombie wants this of his Michael as well, as indicated in the scene in which he appears to let Danny Trejo's character handcuff him. For the most part, however, he comes across as a dumb, hulking beast.

There is simply too much time devoted to the prequel aspect of the film, and it does drag. So when the action does pick up, it comes at an absolute breakneck pace. We don't get enough time to like Annie or Lynda, they were simply there to serve one purpose: to be killed by Michael in a brutal manner. Yes, the original is slow, but that's why it works. The whole movie plays out like a cat and mouse chase. The cat has escaped and is in hot pursuit of his mice. The cat is also being hunted by another cat, that of Dr. Loomis. It makes for a very exciting movie. This just feels disjointed and almost like two entirely different films.

Because of the disjointedness, none of the characters can be properly balanced. Loomis runs around in a few scenes spouting his usual crazy ramblings about Michael, but he isn't used nearly as much as he needs to be. He is supposed to be Michael's antithesis, and yet Zombie chooses to have Loomis tell Michael he is his best friend. The Loomis of the original has literally been driven mad by his failure to reach Michael, and this Loomis just seems to make money off him. Laurie isn't nearly as likable as she is in the original. That Laurie truly loved and cared about her charges, enough to sacrifice herself if she needed to. This Laurie taunts the children and really seems to be only concerned with herself.

Why is Michael allowed to have a metal fork in a sanitarium? For that matter, why is he allowed access to staples and glue in which he makes his masks with? Why does he go from being a chatty Cathy to suddenly going completely silent? How does Loomis get the sheriff's car when we last saw him running towards the Myers place? Why is it supposed to be in the late 90's, and yet people are still dressed from the 70's and using cell phones from the 00's? Little things like this really distracted me from the film.

The ending itself is another matter. Simply put, there isn't one. The original is brilliant in that Michael gets shot, vanishes and then is heard breathing everywhere. Evil never dies, period. We are supposed to believe that this Michael can be shot multiple times, but a lone bullet to the head will bring him down? I guess evil never dies unless it gets a .357 to the skull then....

What the Hell is an Update?

I had completely forgotten that this blog existed, but I suppose life can do that to a person. I took up blogging on Myspace, but much prefer the look and privacy here.


In May, I should have been celebrating my graduation with my MA in theology. I was able to complete the program in just 16 months, becoming the fastest person ever in the school's 50 year history to do so. I was planning on starting my phD right away and relocating to a new apartment. And then I was dealt a huge heartache.

My father, the man I love and idolize more than anything in this world, disclosed to me something I was trying to deny. He is battling very rare and very aggressive tonsil and throat cancer believed to be caused by exposure to Agent Orange in the Vietnam War.

I didn't even hestitate. I pushed all my plans aside and came home to be with him. I don't at all regret this choice, but sometimes I am overwhelmed emotionally. My dad has always been Superman to me, and I could never envision him being ill or facing mortality. I hate that he has to receive radiation everyday and go through chemo.

The community has been wonderful. They are sponsoring a benefit spaghetti dinner for him on Saturday to help defray some of the medical expenses. The chemo and radiation are over 100,000 each, and this is not counting his weekly blood withdrawals, his 50+ miles a day to receive treatments and the 28,000 dollar bill for his biopsy procedure. Every little bit will help us and its been so touching to see the community come together. Some of his friends even shaved their heads to show him their loyalty to him.

Of course I would set aside everything for my father. This is a man who rented me the Monster Squad every night without complaint, bought me my car, provided me with a college education, and supported me in everything I ever wanted to do. When I told him I wanted to be a theologian, he never objected. Never lectured me about the lack of money I would make. He was just happy I was pursuing a passion. He's been my cheerleader through it all. He's done without so much so that I could have it all. He once took a whole paycheck so that I could have saxophone lessons.

So really, I don't feel like I am doing nearly enough for him.

I was thrilled Saturday when I got a call from my mother saying my brother and sister-in-law were in town for my brother's stepfather's father's funeral (was that complicated enough?) . I was in Wheeling visiting some friends, but I took Margaret with me and made the trek to Morgantown. My brother is the second most important man in my life, and getting to see us all together was joyful. My father has lost his hair and teeth, but he refuses to lose his sarcastic, witty edge. My brother and I are cut from the same cloth, so we had a great time ribbing on my sister-in-law, Margaret and my mother.

All I know is that I am grateful to God. I understood why I was able to get through my MA so quickly, so that I could channel my time into my father. I am also grateful that God brought a person back into my life that I have always cared for. Just getting to talk to this person has been a peaceful and pleasant experience for me. It's not everyday someone comes along who not only appreciates your sarcasm and humor, but works to trump it. I know this person is also dealing with some major issues to work out, but that person knows I will always be here for him. I am just very proud of how much he has worked towards the greater good.

Hard to say where things will lead, but taking it one day at a time has been wonderful so far. ..


Probably going to venture out and see the Halloween remake in a little bit, so my thoughts on that should be up later. Halloween is a sacred movie to me, and having Rob Zombie turn Michael Myers into a lumbering Jason-like killer makes my soul die a little on the inside.