I first saw all the Elm Street flicks back when I was a kid. Except this one.
"Some directors try to express themselves through the horror genre, some directors try to do so in spite of the horror genre, I'm one of the latter" says Freddy's Revenge director Jack Sholder on the making of documentary. Fair Enough.
I was not a hater of this one even when it was originally released. I was ten when the first one came out so I missed getting in on it at that time.
This movie gets very disrespected in the franchise.
I watching this film with an open mind today because I've seen the first one AND the remake. The first one is a classic, I admire the imagination of it but I still preferred the remake, it was gritty, disturbing and gory, just like these films should be.
Well that was a waste of a great potential to see a horror film built around the body horror of Freddy being able to literally crawl inside the skin of one half of a loving couple.Shame the acting was worse than originals and the creativity is lost along with the more sound writing and directing.
Having recently moved into the same house as one of the victims in the original film, a teenage boy by the name of "Jesse Walsh" (Mark Patton) begins to have nightmares. Since he is new at school he doesn't have too many people to confide in until a fight erupts during physical education which pits him against another classmate named "Ron Grady" (Robert Rusler).
Freddy's revenge is a good movie. don't let all the bad reviews cloud your judgment.
A teenage boy (Mark Patton) is haunted in his dreams by Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) who is out to possess him to continue his murdering in the real world.Although this film is generally good, it does not hold up to be as strong as part one or part three.
