03-27-2009, 08:38 PM
We'll see how this turns out...I don't like how the review seemed to blame Freddy's humor on Robert Englund. Aside from a few ad libs perhaps, most of Freddy's humorous lines came from lame writers, not from Robert Englund. Are they forgetting that Englund played the original creepy Freddy in part 1 (and arguably part 2)? Give me a break...Also, adee is right about the glove. If he wasn't a murderer before being killed, then they're at least going to have to do away with the idea that the parents knew, and kept the glove, etc. Also, if he's not a janitor, the making of the glove at all (either before or after being killed) doesn't make much sense. The whole point was that he was in a boiler room, and built a crude instrument with things on hand. If he's a gardener/day care provider, it would be more natural to see an Edward Scissorhands glove perhaps 
At the same time, I'm not that worried if the story changes a little from the original. If you look at deleted scenes from the original, that film was actually much different than the final edit. The parents were originally intended to start suspecting that Freddy was responsible for the murders, and struggling with what they had done. But in the final edit, they just continually assert that Nancy is nuts. So I think there is plenty of wiggle room for the story really, especially in a remake.
At the same time, I'm not that worried if the story changes a little from the original. If you look at deleted scenes from the original, that film was actually much different than the final edit. The parents were originally intended to start suspecting that Freddy was responsible for the murders, and struggling with what they had done. But in the final edit, they just continually assert that Nancy is nuts. So I think there is plenty of wiggle room for the story really, especially in a remake.