| A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) 91 min |
| This landmark film, which gave birth to one of the most popular and charismatic screen villains of all time really needs little introduction. At his peak, Freddy Krueger was a user friendly, wise cracking, merchandising machine on par with KISS. Before all that though, Freddy was the antagonist of New Line Cinema's first feature production (they had been merely a distribution company before) and a filthy, menacing child murderer. The film's that followed had their ups and downs (mostly ups, I think) but Freddy evolved into a cultural icon and lost a lot of the mystery and dispicable nature that made his so intimidating. Though the sequels were successfull in transforming Freddy into something more widely accessible, nothing they have done has been able to dilute the sheer intensity of the character present in this film. |
| Stylistically, the film owes a lot more to Phantasm than is commonly acknowledged. It's well documented now how director Wes Craven was inspired by actual new stories when constructing the main concept of the film (young adults fearing that they will die if they go to sleep), but asthetically much of the sureal imagery and set pieces are remarkably similar in tone to Don Coscarelli's 1979 opus. Craven uses the dreams to drive the story in an extremely effective and disorienting manner much like was done in Phantasm. Craven does go a step further and make the dreams more metaphorical, but he sometimes falters in doing so. The metaphors are at times clumsy and run the risk of contradicting each other at times. Of course, this really only comes into play when looking closely at Craven's ever-evolving commentary on the film over the years. Griping and the such aside, as a stand alone piece, A Nightmare on Elm Street is a powerhouse of a horror film. |
| We are probably all familiar with the story by now, a demented child murder was set free on a legal technicality and hunted down by a lynch mob of angry parents. They burned him alive and now he's striking back at the by killing their children through their dreams. More background information is given on Freddy and his remains in the sequels and to some degree in extended scenes presented as features on the DVD (the fact that all the original Elm Street kids had older siblings killed by Freddy). The main body of the story concerns Nancy Thompson (the lovely Heather Langenkamp) trying to get to the bottom of the mystery and do something about it before her and all of her friends are killed by the razor wielding madman. |
| The cast is surprisingly good for a film of this nature and budget. The kids (most notably Langenkamp and Johnny Depp) play the movie very straight and avoid the kind of over acting that could have eliminated any sympathy for the characters. In fact Langenkamp is one of the most charismatic horror heroins to come out of the era (along with Nightmare 4 & 5 star Lisa Wilcox!). The adult cast is lead by genre vet John Saxon who puts in one of his strongest performances to date (second only to his turn in Cannibal Apocalypse in my opinion). Wreaking havoc on all their lives is Robert Englund in the role that made him a household name. Englund is monsterous, creepy, dark, and downright vicous in this first entry. His voice is deeper here than it was later on, almost to the point of being inhuman. There is enough humanity left in him though, to make him scarier than a typical movie monster. There's something about his twisted and taunting nature in this movie that has proved impossible to duplicate. He has a sinister sense of humor, but that's always kept in check so that he's consistantly menacing. Together this cast creates a chemistry that's rarely seen in this genre or any other. The sympathy built up for the kids makes Freddy utterly terrifying. |
| As outstanding as I find the perfomances put forth here, I also realize that it wouldn't be fair to ignore how technically effective the film is. While not as slick or polished as later entries, Craven uses budgetary limitations to his advantage. Since so much improvisation seems to have been used in the visual approach, most of the shocks are unpredictable. The feet sinking in the stairs and Freddy's face sliding off are surefire winners with new viewers. These moments are so far from telegraphed that there is no warning beforehand. Other visuals aren't as shocking but are haunting, Freddy's long arms scratching the ally walls and his curious tongue, for example. Another spectacular set piece has an invisible Freddy dragging a young girl up the walls and across the ceiling of her bedroom as her boyfriend looks on in terror. On the DVD/LD commentary the execution of this scene is explained in detail, but that in no way deminishes the awe of the scene in later visuals. This movie is also a testament to the effective use of low budget mechanical effects. While there are several beautifully executed scenes throughout, they are all used to propell the story foward. We are never subjected to effects that seem to look cool soley for the sake of looking cool. The only effect that looks poor in hindsight is the optical at the climax. It could have been worse, but it does have a tendancy to be distracting as the rest of the movie looks far better. |
| The video has been pretty readily available since it was first released by Media. The videos have never been especially good in the quality, until Anchor Bay released a two tape set in 1996. This one is now pretty hard to find but has some nice extras like deleted/extended scenes. The LD from Image has similar extras, and a commentary with Wes Craven, DP Jacques Haitkin, Heather Langenkamp, and John Saxon. New Line recently released the entire series in a delux box set that contains all these extras and more. One alternate ending is hidden in a labyrinth style game that's included and the other us just included with the other extras for the first film. While it is a fun and novel idea, it's also quite annoying. You can figure out the answers by checking some DVD review sites or going to DVD Easter Eggs.com. There are also several interviews with many of the key players throughout the series. I'll deal with most of them as I discuss each individual film. The section for the first film is understandable the most comprehensive. Actors Langenkamp, Englund, and Saxon join Craven, Sean Cunningham, Robert Shay, Rachel Talalay, and a host of others to discuss the legacy of the film. The film itself is given a more indepth analysis on the aformentioned commentary. The commentary is a mixed bag. To begin with, director of photography Haitkin is pretty much useless at anything other than stroking his own ego. He'll occasionally throw a few compliments Heather's way, but otherwise he does nothing but marvel at what a brilliant job he did. Admittadly, the movie looks nice, but I could go the rest of my life without ever listening to Haitkin talk about himself again. Craven is offers a good deal of insight, but I also get the sense that he's always finding new meaning in the film that he 'always' intended. It seems that every time he gives a new interview he comes up with some new symbolic angle that he had in mind when filming the movie. Langenkamp is as charismatic on the track as she is in the film. She's constantly laughing and seems to have some genuinely fond memories of the experience. I was reminded a little of the charming Felissa Rose on the Sleepaway Camp commentary. Saxon is a class act as always. He keeps really quiet throughout, only chiming in occasionally to pay tribute to someone else involved (Haitkin should take notes). Although flawed, this commentary is a winner. The same can be said for the box set as a whole. There is room for improvement, but I would consider this one a must have for any fan of the franchise. The discs are also released individually, but without the eighth disc that contains all the features. |
| I give this one a full 5 twirling lawnmowers out of 5! |
| review by Joe Canistro 07/13/2001 |
 |
| Click on the curious head to email me! |
| Coming soon: A look at the novelization published by St. Martin's press (yes, all 72 pages of it)! |