Time For A New NOES Film ???

I do. Bring back Robert or leave it alone.

No one can replace Rob, but I wonder if there is someone out there that looks and acts like him. They could do a solid job. But I also want creative deaths done by great effects. That's not gonna happen, because like the 2010 remake, the studio is gonna butcher and demonetize the hell out of them.

Lisa Wilcox is no Jamie Lee Curtis, though. Of course she wants to do another one. Jamie Lee Curtis has a career outside of Halloween, so bringing her back is a real draw.

Bringing Alice back would matter to fans, but probably would mean nothing to wider audiences. Although I always thought that would be the way to go anyway, it's unlikely to get any bigger budget for the movie.

But at the time that was what I thought Freddy vs Jason should have been; Alice and Tommy Jarvis having to team up. But I get why they went a different way. The new movies generally have to appeal to people who don't care much about the earlier ones.

This.

It’d be similar to Tommy Jarvis for the Friday the 13th franchise I think. It’s a nice nod to fans but not crucial to the overall plot.

NO! i'd rather this franchise be dead and the character Freddy retired as he earned his retirement. It's my fave horror franchise as i love 1 3 4 and liked Freddy's Dead and New Nightmare and some parts of Freddy vs Jason but the 2010 remake was a huge pile of shit i hated and thought 5 was disappointing.

I DO NOT EVER want another recast! it didn't first the first time and they should learn! There are no substitutes for purely cinematic icons like John McClane, Indiana Jones, Freddy Krueger, Ellen Ripley, Sarah Conner, Robocop, Marty McFly, Peter Venkman/Egon Spengler/Winston Zeddmore/Ray Stantz, Doc Emmet Brown, Pinhead, The Tallman, Snake Plisskin etc.

Bond (He came from novels before he became a series of films), Joker, Wolverine, Dorothy Gale, Conan, Frankenstein, Tarzan, Dracula, Batman, Superman, Lara Croft, Shakespear's characters, Spider-Man etc. are ALL entirely DIFFERENT as they are characters brought from the pages of print (books, comics, video game and novels) which are different than PURE CINEMATIC CHARACTERS like Freddy Krueger, Ellen Ripley, Ash Williams from Evil Dead franchise, Rocky Balboa, Marty McFly, Peter Venkman with Ray/Winston/Egon, Indiana Jones, George Bailey, Rick Blaine (Casablanca), Han Solo, T-800 etc.


a character like Dracula is fine. It started as a novel character. Dracula is not a cinematic creation that was only created for the screen and neither was Shakespeare. Dracula is fair game and so are Shakespeare's characters. Same for Pennywise or Jud Crandall in new adaptations of IT and Pet Sematary as those are novel characters.


A character like Freddy Krueger though that was brought to life by an actor on screen. It's not worth trying to do a different interpretation of that character, because that character wouldn't be as popular or as well known without Englund's unique performance.


Film is a completely different method of storytelling than a book or a play or a video game.

Remakes are a different thing all together. I enjoy both versions of Night of the Living Dead. And with the original NOTLD and its characters and performances they aren't nearly as iconic as Robert Englund's Freddy Krueger.

I honestly do feel though that Robert's performance will continue to stand the test of time for decades to come. It already has for nearly 40 years. I do see the difference. Dracula was an established character long before it was brought to the screen in 1931 by Tod Browning and Bela Lugosi.

The same applies with Shakespeare and his characters. They are not characters they were brought to life by the actors who portrayed them on film. Screenplays are a completely different story telling medium than a novel or a play.


They rely upon an individual actor to really bring that role to life and make it resonate with an audience. Freddy doesn't say that many lines in A Nightmare On Elm Street. It is Englund's presence and unique take on the character that makes that character so iconic. It isn't the script or the character by itself. It is that unique combination of actor and script that makes a cinematic character iconic.

They already tried to recast Freddy even after the first ANOES and they realized that was a bad idea. And then with the 2010 remake it was once again proven that Freddy Krueger is one of those characters like many other cinematic icons that needs the actor that portrayed them to make it work on screen.

Jackie's freddy was neither funny, fun or scary as he was just laughable even with his skinless cat look, joyless attitude and southern hick accent to make the character seem like a Rob Zombie version of the character, i mean what a joke. I mean Jackie was great as Rorschach in Watchmen but poor as Freddy Krueger when it proves, you can't do it! Robert IS Freddy and will die with Freddy.

It's better to let those purely cinematic characters i mentioned retire or die when the actor who put their personal stamp on it quits or passes away. Otherwise you get half assed performances like whoever has tried to play Pinhead after Doug Bradley, and many other recent examples like Robocop.


The casting wasn't bad for Freddy on the Elm Street remake. Him and i admit that. But the issue is that even with a talented actor like Jackie Earle Haley, Freddy just doesn't have the same gravitas as he does with Robert Englund. Plus the Jackie version was horrible as he felt soulless, void of charisma and personality. He is proof Robert Englund is the ONE AND ONLY Freddy Krueger, accept no substitutes. Novel characters like Jud Crandall and Pennywise for new adaptations of Pet Sematary and IT are safe to recast as they were brought to life in the pages of a book before they were movies and mini-series and aren't like original cinematic horror icons like Freddy.

Characters like Leatherface, Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers are completely different! Those characters don't rely upon actors with unique personalities or charisma to bring them to life or to ultimately make them what they are.

Bond was a character long before the films came along that was brought to life on the page, and the characters of Michael Myers, Jason Voorhees and Leatherface don't speak and don't rely upon anything other than a physical presence to make them spring to life.

Where with Freddy, Ash from Evil Dead franchise, Tallman from Phantasm franchise or even Pinhead, the actor has to be both a physical and an emotional presence. Which is what makes those roles nearly impossible to recast. Because of how closely tied they are to the actor's performance.

The actor's performances in A Nightmare On Elm Street or Evil Dead or Phantasm or Hellraiser were the largest factor in the success and impact of those characters. Their unique personalities and charisma is what made those characters icons. Without them those characters are one and done and nothing but distant memories. Doug Bradley with Bruce Campbell and Angus Scrimm are THOSE characters they played and since Angus Scrimm kicked the bucket in 2016, The Tallman died with him.

And even respected people in the industry are against this concept of recasting cinematic original icons. Robert Zemeckis and Bob Gale as long as they are around will not sign off on a remake of Back To The Future, and plan on having the rights as a part of their estates and even give a no remake policy to the family will of both. At least they should know better as Back to the Future trilogy was lightning in a bottle and you can't capture the same magic as the trilogy, so Universal comes up with different merchandise, appereal, comics and video games throughout the years even have them on streaming sites so generations can see this amazing trilogy for what it was.

Robert Englund recently said he's too old to play Freddy Krueger and has retired the character, see folks, the character dies with him even though he didn't die because Englund's DNA is in Freddy Krueger and is the heart/soul of the character. Just let Freddy go. Robert has so much DNA inside of that character that its just not possible to really recast him successfully. They already tried that and it was a total failure. Englund's DNA is in that character. He is what made it what it is. You can't replace that let alone replicate it.

It's like when Liam was replaced by Arnold Vosloo in the Darkman sequels. That didn't work out.



Here's a video by one of the best youtube critics Ocpcommunications about this subject on why it's impossible to recast purely cinematic icons and why it's a bad idea and different than recasting book/video game/comic characters on film.

I say let this franchise rest in peace on film and be retired from film with the character dead! let the character and it's legacy live on through books, merchandise, appreal, comics and video games which are fare games than staining the character's legacy on film when it's already dead. Come up with new franchises and new characters! take for example WolfCop, Annabelle, The Nun, Captain Splauding, Jigsaw, The Creeper, etc and they all gave it a shot and it's ok to let some older franchises like Elm Street just die from film and live on through other medias i mentioned and make new icons and new franchises.

I'd rather this franchise rest in peace in favor of new franchises and new horror icons. Stop trying to beat a dead horse.