A Nightmare on Elm Street
Has any filmmaker in the modern era been as remade as Wes Craven? In the past 5 years or so alone, we’ve been “treated” to revisits of his “The Hills Have Eyes,” “The Last House on the Left,” and this week, his seminal ’80s horror classic “A Nightmare on Elm Street.”
Watching the earlier version again, a couple of things strike me. 1) Twenty minutes in and the first victim- opening sequence bait Tina (Amanda Wyss)- is slashed by nightmare killer Freddy Kreuger (Robert Englund, who even without the makeup is creepy looking). 2) Craven has a gift for a level of realism that makes even the most fantastic scenario plausible, like, for example, a child killer whose spirit lives on to kill in dreams after the parents of this small town set him on fire. This is what has always set Craven’s film apart from the other franchise slashers of the late ’70s and early ’80s. Well, that and a gallows humor courtesy of England’s portrayal of Freddy that makes him more, oddly enough, human than most of the other slashers of the era (though his backstory makes Michael Myers a villain of the same kin).
Craven has learned his craft well over the years, which is why he was able to return to this series ten years later (with his underappreciated “New Nightmare”) and continue to turn this genre on its’ head like he did with this film. He fearlessly goes into terrain the genre had never gone before, with dream logic, psychological intrigue and parental vigilantism, while also following the rules of the genre. Sex? A no no. “Don’t go in there” moments? Check. A female who wins out in the end? Eh, sort of (that’s another twist Craven added to the film), but let’s face it, Heather Langenkamp’s Nancy is one of the best female leads the genre has ever seen (and certainly a prototype for Neve Campbell’s Sidney in Craven’s “Scream” trilogy).
He also makes the acting find of the half-century with Johnny Depp, who was in his first film as Nancy’s boyfriend. True, there’s no real display of the range and depth we’d see from him later starting with “Edward Scissorhands” and beyond (his performance here makes one wonder whether he would’ve just been a convention staple had he not become a megastar), but to say Craven got lucky would be a discredit to the filmmaker- he clearly saw something in Depp when he cast him.
The dream sequences are the real stars here, though. Craven eschews the typical slasher mentality and follows dream logic down a pretty unnerving rabbit hole he gooses up with suspense and imagination, especially when Nancy goes into her dreams to catch Freddy at the end, and, well, reality and dream gets blurred to an almost incomprehensible degree.
Still, this is more than “just another slasher” (hopefully the makers of the remake realize this- they at least did right by their hiring of Jackie Earl Haley as Freddy). This is an icon in a genre that can be made cheaply (and all-too-often) and is capable of turning a profit regardless of quality. Thankfully, Craven is a master who- like Hitchcock- has always been more interested in playing the audience like a piano than by selling out for easy money (yes, he just started prep of “Scream 4,” and yes, he’s made clunkers like “Cursed” and “Vampire in Brooklyn,” but at least the latter two had some interesting ideas in them). And by choosing a situation where we’re most vulnerable to unleash his greatest villain, Craven took a play or two from Hitch’s book. Come on, you can’t tell me he wasn’t inspired a little bit by the shower scene in “Psycho” when he came up with this story?
