Related Sections: Horror Interviews Movies News Top Stories
Is Nightmare's new Freddy Krueger innocent?
We caught up with Jackie Earle Haley—the new Freddy Krueger in the reboot of A Nightmare on Elm Street—last week on the Vancouver set of his upcoming Fox TV show, Human Target, and he gave us a lot of scoop on what to expect about his new version of the razor-clawed killer.
Here's a list of four things the new Freddy will be, one he won't and one that remains an open question as Haley (Rorschach in Watchmen) takes over the role made famous by Robert Englund.
1) Freddy will have the iconic accessories. "I know [director] Sam [Bayer] felt very strongly that we definitely needed some familiarities, like the glove, the sweater and the hat, those iconic things," Haley told us exclusively on Wednesday. The recently released teaser trailer reveals that Haley's Freddy will have the fedora, the razor glove and the striped sweater.
2) Freddy will have a new face. "I know that they definitely took some creative license with the new look at the makeup," Haley said. "Sam kind of wanted to go more realistic, and him and Andrew Clement [special makeup effects designer/creator] did a great job of kind of creating a real kind of like burn victim. You know, it's still got a hint of monster in it, but it's more grounded than that."
3) Freddy gets more backstory. "We delve into the backstory a little bit more in this one," Haley said. "To me it seems like this is pretty much a remake, a re-envisioning of that first film. I know that there's other plot points and stuff from other things in there, but to me it feels mostly like that first one re-imagined, and so we did get a little bit more into, I think, the backstory, as opposed to just sitting at a, you know, at a fireplace and having Nancy, his mom, just give a monologue. We actually go back and see some of it, and it's kind of interesting."
4) But there's a few new elements. "There's some different twists and turns in there that weren't there from before," Haley said. "That, I think, will keep it interesting."
5) Freddy won't make jokes. "I think where Sam and I were coming from with the performance is probably to ground it a little bit, a little bit darker, a little bit more serious," Haley said.
6) Is Freddy innocent? In the teaser trailer, we see Haley's Freddy running from the angry mob, screaming that he didn't do anything. Does that mean this version of Freddy Krueger isn't a child murderer? Are we supposed to feel sympathy for him?
"It's hard to say," Haley says coyly.
Hard to say?
"Well, you know what, I don't know how to answer that," Haley says. "I'd rather just say, let's see the movie and see if that question bears out or not. Throw it right back at you."
A Nightmare on Elm Street opens April 30, 2010.
By djc at 3:15 PM ON 10/30/09
This sounds bad... and not in a good way, more in a "not going to see that one then" - way.
Freddy is the Monster, the Boogeyman, the Thing Under the Bed...not the innocent burn victim come to exact revenge. Freddy was and still is not the hero, I think that's where they went wrong.
By shaddoe at 3:21 PM ON 10/30/09
WRONG!! Robert Englund's Freddy is the monster, the Boogeyman, etc. This is Jackie Earle Haley's Freddy Krueger.
If there are changes to the character, then its to basically separate the new Freddy from the old Freddy. If this Freddy is innocent and was basically some sort of scapegoat for the fury of the Springwood parents, then it would make sense that he would come back to take revenge. He becomes a monster yes, but a monster created by other people.
If you are persecuted by people for a crime you didn't commit, and end up being killed while still proclaiming your innocence, and no one believes you, you'd be pretty pissed off too!
By Keith at 3:30 PM ON 10/30/09
Changes aside...i hope he's scary. I remember being scared to death of freddy and still get chills when i hear the music from the original movie. If they can pull that off, it will be a worthwhile venture.
By Sithboy at 3:31 PM ON 10/30/09
It would make more sense if he was innocent. A guilty murderer who was killed by the parents of his victims wouldn't have much cause for coming back for revenge, as he got what he deserved. Seems like, if there was some sort of "demon council" that he had to appeal to in order to get the dream-entering power, they'd deny him on the grounds that he is not entitled to revenge. But an innocent man would be entitled to revenge, and would be that much more fearsome and vengeful of a demon. Pissed off indeed!`
By Kikstad at 3:37 PM ON 10/30/09
Just as I feared. I think having a humorless Freddy Krueger is a big mistake. Based on the trailer, I suspected that they were trying to make the character killed for a crime he didn't commit, but then why would he haunt kids and kill them? It doesn't seem to make sense. If it's a revenge motive, isn't he going after the worng people? Freddy Krueger is supposed to be a monster -- why try to make him sympathetic? I'm CONFUSED.
By Hamlet at 3:38 PM ON 10/30/09
In point #3, did he really refer to Nancy as his mom??
By asfm at 3:39 PM ON 10/30/09
Hard to say? I heard quite a while ago, and in no uncertain terms, that he is innocent. I read that Freddy was just being used as a scapegoat.
I assume it's because we can't in good conscience root for a child murderer and possible rapist (until he has good reason, like revenge on the parents!), so now the parents are the bad guys, Freddy is an innocent, and the kids are the victims of the sins of their parents as much as they are Freddy's victims.
I think absolutely everyone is more sympathetic this way, except the parents. But the parents were never important to begin with, and were always sort of in minor antagonist roles since they didn't believe their kids.
The whole story makes way more sense to me if Freddy is innocent.
By Overquoted at 3:42 PM ON 10/30/09
...Have you ever actually seen the original, Sithboy? 'Demon council'? Wth are you talking about? The old flicks never really went into how he came back from the dead, merely that he did so to get revenge on the vengeful parents who killed him.
Having an innocent Freddy would blow. We already have one 'poor me' movie killer. And really, if you'd done something evil and had a victim kill you...would YOU just shrug and say, "Eh, I deserved it"?
Freddy was cool because he *was* an unrepentant killer. And if there aren't any Freddy jokes, I don't see how this will be any different from the torture-porn of Hostel. Or the old slasher flicks of Halloween and Friday the 13th. Freddy had personality, insanely evil and wicked as it was. You take away the jokes, and what do you have? A homicidal maniac just like the rest.
One word: boring.
By asfm at 3:42 PM ON 10/30/09
To clarify, everyone being more sympathetic is a good thing, since everyone roots for Freddy anyway, but we have to stay connected with the kids because they do ultimately win.
By Mad Hatter at 4:11 PM ON 10/30/09
Actually in the original movie there weren't any Freddy jokes. Freddy was silent during the whole movie and didn't even speak till the second movie.
By Mandy at 4:19 PM ON 10/30/09
I do NOT like the idea of Freddu Krueger being innocent. That unnerves me. Nothing bothers me more than someone suffering for something they didn't do. There are enough sympathetic monsters out there. Freddy does NOT need to be one of them.
By Alverant at 4:38 PM ON 10/30/09
So maybe Freddy is innocent of killing kids. He "only" molested them and one was so traumatized he/she killed him/herself. That would justify Freddy saying "he didn't do it" but still make him morally and legally guilty.
By jdmimic at 4:46 PM ON 10/30/09
While I can see the point of the sympathetic monster, for Freddy I would disagree. Freddy was a demonic, unrepentent (as stated earlier) killer who enjoyed what he was doing. The vengeance thing was just an excuse to murder.
Not everyone rooted for Freddy. To root for him means that you wanted him to win, which would be a really sick and depraved thing to do. Sure, watching him hack and slash annoying teenagers can be entertaining, but to actually take his side on an emotional basis (the whole meaning of "rooting" for someone) is seriously messed up, I don't care how funny you found his jokes.
I think making him a sympathetic monster ruins him, makes him less interesting, and certainly much less horrific.
i think it important to show that sometimes, there really are true instances of evil and not everything can or should be smoothed over with a society is to blame reasoning.
Sheesh, been waxing philosophically today. I need to go watch some good old fashioned violent horror movies now:)
By Tinythai at 5:43 PM ON 10/30/09
Freddy's innocent? It explains why he's so pissed off. If I were burned to death for a crime I didn't commit I'd be out for some revenge, too.
By Alverant at 5:44 PM ON 10/30/09
@jdmimic
Gotta agree. In the movies there can be pure, intentional evil. Real life is different. Not many go around doing evil for the sake of evil. Even terrorists think they're on the side of God in what they do (a twisted God but still God).
Freddy should be evil with no redeeming values except for teaching horny teenagers to wait until marriage. You give a reason to feel sympathy for him and you ruin the character.
By Mandy at 5:50 PM ON 10/30/09
I like sympathetic monsters but Freddy should NOT be one of them. To make him innocent of the crimes he died for ruins the whole feel of Nightmare on Elm Street. And it turns my stomach when people suffer for something they didn't do. I can't enjoy the movie now.
By Mark in St. Louis at 6:02 PM ON 10/30/09
Don't know if he's innocent or not, but I know if I had a group of people chasing me, trying to kill me, I'd be yelling that I didn't do anything, too.
By Sithboy at 6:03 PM ON 10/30/09
LOL, don't worry Overquoted, I was just making that "demon council" thing up. Speculating some supernatural regulatory board that hands out powers. Otherwise, where do these powers come from? Freddy can't just give it to himself!
I definitely agree that Freddy wouldn't be the same without the corny jokes. That'd be like James Bond without his one-liners!
By Mark in St. Louis at 6:44 PM ON 10/30/09
- Overquoted and Sithboy:
Check out the 6th movie in the series "Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare". In it they discuss the "dream demons" that make deal with Freddy that gives him his powers. The final scene with them is even in 3D! Kind of look like piranha, if I remember right.
By Roberto Englundo at 6:45 PM ON 10/30/09
Hey SyFy. I've retyped what I believe to be good comments regarding this topic 3 times, However, it keeps getting rejected because it says I have typed the incorrect text when I darn well know I typed it correctly. I am very peeved because my comment was pretty long, and when it gets rejected the comment is erased. Why is that? With all the computer technology, it has to be that way?
By Roberto Englundo at 6:47 PM ON 10/30/09
You've gotta be kidding me. WHYYYYYYY!!!!!
By Greyryder at 7:28 PM ON 10/30/09
Personally, I'm glad to see them get away from the jokes that were introduced in the sequels. He should be a scary supernatural murder machine, not a stand up comic.
I'm still put off by the burn scars, though. Those should be fresh oozing burns, unless Freddy languished in the hospital for a while, before he died.
Unless, in this new movie he's still alive, and is striking out with his mind?
By tb83 at 9:00 PM ON 10/30/09
wwwwwwhhhhhhhooooooo cares! They should never have remade Friday the 13th or even halloween for that matter but i just goes to show u Hollywood still has no new ideas
By Roberto Englundo at 9:44 PM ON 10/30/09
We've already had funny, nonscary Freddy. Let's have a more serious tone and make Freddy scary again. He kills children for crying out loud. I think changing the makeup effects is a good idea. This film is undeniably a fantastical horror/slasher/monster flick, but giving it a dose of reality here and there will make it scarier and more relatable.
By Roberto Englundo at 9:52 PM ON 10/30/09
I think it would be a good twist if Freddy is innocent. What better way to get back at the adults than to torment and kill their children. He will have become in death the nightmare that they thought he was in life. In response to Mandy's comments: People will lose sympathy pretty quick when he starts killing kids. As far as your stomach turning over innocent people suffering for things they did not do: That may be the filmakers intent. Disgust and uneasy feelings can make for a good horror movie. Most victims in these types of movies are innocent anyway.
By hermy at 10:03 PM ON 10/30/09
i hear alot of comments about why all the remakes?duh for the most part by Hollywood standards there cheap to make.and make lots of money.especially horror remakes.but hey if they do it right (witch is almost never)by putting a diffrent spin on it.i'm a little open to it
By The Middle Claw at 11:13 PM ON 10/30/09
People should stop whining about little(and MAYBE some big)changes. If you want a carbon copy of the original, which I do love, then just watch the original. I myself am hoping for Freddy to look and be scary again and not be a latex mask wearing comedian. I remember seeing the first one and being scared, and then seeing the rest and laughing my ass off. Make Freddy scary.
By Johnny25 at 4:28 AM ON 10/31/09
Tinytha, what are you talking about? I've seen the movie a bunch of times including tonight, and Freddy does talk throughout the movie. He doesn't make jokes. But he speaks quite a bit. So, you're wrong on him not speaking till the 2nd film.
By AngryJonny at 10:37 AM ON 10/31/09
Johnny25,
I was going to say the same thing. Of course Freddy talks during the first film. What a ludicrous thing for Mad Hatter to believe.
By irkillroy at 11:21 PM ON 10/31/09
I think that if he's innocent his revenge is misplaced in the children. As for the original series, I believe it was #5 they explained that he was approached by some trio of immortals while he was burning to haunt the children in their dreams.
This new "re-imagining" is going to be a bit more lame than the original because in the first movie there was limited background (left to your imagination) and it was kept to the teenage urban-legand style of story. He wasn't showed much to keep the suspense going (ridley scott did the same thing for alien, that's what made it so scary!).
When you go too deep into a history you lose the suspense and half the scariness to it.
I'll wait for the reviews from my friends before I commit to paying to see it.
By Smiller at 12:21 AM ON 11/01/09
*goes into a field position* this does not exist. this does not exist. this does not exist........
By Marty B. at 11:38 AM ON 11/01/09
Smiller, I think you want to go into a *fetal* position.
I sort of see where Mandy comes from if Freddy is somehow "innocent" of whatever the parent mob torches him for. In the original series, the parents arguably do something "evil" for arguably "good" reasons (if I remember right, they go mob on him because he is somehow free from the justice system on a technicality) but in doing so they sort of unlock or enable a greater "evil" within Freddy. The premise here seems to just posit a world with a perpetual cycle of evil doing. Freddy's not some innocent white lamb, but he's murdered because he's a scapegoat but a mob that wants someone to die (even if it's the wrong person), Freddy comes back to enact spectacular revenge, and so on and on....
Didn't realize/remember that Freddy was basiclally unspeaking in the first movie and wasn't fleshed out as a character till the sequels. Honestly, I didn't see much of the film series, but I did really like the Freddy's Nightmares TV series. That ever land on DVD?
By Marty B. at 11:39 AM ON 11/01/09
unspeaking = not joking apparently, don't remember it all too well
By chucksgurl at 7:37 PM ON 11/01/09
SOme of you obviously did not see all the Nightmare on Elm St movies because in part 5 (3d no less) shows the demons entering Freddie as he is burned alive so that he could come back to exact revenge. I agree an innocent Freddy makes no sense. You should not want to root for the bad guy or feel sorry for him and the whole no humor idea sucks to because that made the movies entertaining! Watch all the movies because he was a child molesting murdering monster. But congrats to Jackie I mean 20 something years later you get the iconic part when you lost you first audition to Johnny Depp. I have always been a fan of JEH. Bad News Bears was great but he really brought Worshack to life and was the best thing about Watchmen!
By Marty B. at 9:27 AM ON 11/02/09
Hasn't Candyman already covered the nightmarish demon who was actually a victim?
By sneaky at 10:11 AM ON 11/02/09
What about other elements in his past like the bastard child of 100 maniacs and his mother the nun
By Sheeyah at 12:03 AM ON 11/06/09
I think some of you are over-analyzing a "horror" movie. Personally, I don't think this series needs a remake at all. Maybe the older teen/college crowd will like it, but probably not many that have already seen the original. They really should come up with something new instead of just redoing what's already been done.
By ... at 4:06 PM ON 11/07/09
you mess up freddy hes says funny things that are creepy and scary like come to freddy and stuff like that
Visit mobile.syfy.com/wire on your mobile device.
...:
you mess up freddy hes says funny things that are creepy and scary like come to freddy and stuff like that...More »