Official Noes Remake Review Thread!

[🪦 myers04 ●]

i liked it alot. great remake.jackie killed it as freddy.

[🪦 Megatron ●]

jackie will never rank up to robert's iconic stat as freddy but its a good start for some people who may not even know who freddy is...i way i see horror remakes is a way of letting today's younger generations experience first hand yesterday's iconic characters/films and reborn them to anew.....lets put it this way, some people have never even heard of that guy with the knife but when they see a guy who is dress as michael they mistakenly call him jason?( i can vouch for some people who has dressed as michael in the past for halloween and is mistaken for jason). the point is that if it wasn't for rob zombie remaking halloween, today's young generation will not know or even hear of the legendary that guy with the knife......the same goes for other horror remakes.......there will never be another mike, jason, freddy etc as their iconic status is embedded in history which i guess is the reason why hollywood decides to bring them back and remake them....some people may prefer the remakes over the original because original lacks blood, gore, etc and has aged over time to the point where some people who don't like classic cinema forget that remakes lack the heart from the original......however in my opinion remakes is a great introduction for younger audiences to get to know their horror films and later on in life if they get the chance to watch the originals and compare them to the remake then they will know first hand that the original will always be classics....

[🪦 clownnation ●]

I liked it. better than most Fred movies. Some SpFX was bad (the cartoon freddy coming out of the wall?!) but I was entertained. not perfect but at least we get a freddy movie

[🪦 DarklyScanner ●]

Who honestly cares if the younger generation doesn't know about about that Michael or Jason? I know I don't. I'd say it's more annoying to discuss the originals now because any time you bring up Halloween, F13 or Nightmare on Elm Street, you have to clarify you're talking about the original. And then half the time, the person who asked you which one you meant hasn't even seen the original. I don't think remakes have helped the originals in any way. They are already considered classics among film critics, not just horror fans, but the larger film community. That says a lot about the quality of certain classic horror films. Are any of the remakes of those classics going to be considered in that same category? Of course not. I'd say remakes are actually bad introductions to the original films because 99% of them are done horribly. And since the younger generation doesn't know a good film from a bad one, they're going to automatically prefer the way the remake did something just because it's modern.This generation needs to have its own bogeyman instead of copying the last generation's. That's what the genre is really lacking. No matter who we get to replace Freddy, Michael or Jason, it's never going to be better... and isn't that the point of making movies? To do something better that hasn't been done before? At least Europe's trying their hand at it, and even if I don't like them much, I give them more credit than most American horror directors right now.

[🪦 Razorthroat ●]

I consider some remakes a goodthing. I've wanted to see the uncut version of My Bloody Valentine for the longest time. Then the remake came out and it finally got released on dvd. Plus I enjoyed the remake of it too. I think it was way too early to do a Freddy remake since the last movie of him was done in 2003.

[🪦 Megatron ●]

yeah a freddy remake really came out of the blue.......

[🪦 DAKAZA ●]

<!--quoteo(post=362601:date=May 15 2010, 09:33 PM:name=DarklyScanner)<div class=\'quotetop\'>QUOTE (DarklyScanner @ May 15 2010, 09:33 PM) <a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=362601\"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class=\'quotemain\'><!--quotecI don't think remakes have helped the originals in any way. They are already considered classics among film critics, not just horror fans, but the larger film community. That says a lot about the quality of certain classic horror films. Are any of the remakes of those classics going to be considered in that same category? Of course not.<!--QuoteEnd</div><!--QuoteEEndOf course not? Sorry man, you're wrong. All the remake bashing is really irritating me. The fact of the matter is, some of the greatest horror movies of all time were remakes. Does The Thing (1982) ring a bell? How about The Fly (1986)? Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), The Blob (1988) and NOTLD (1990) also come to mind. These are just a few.Will some of the newer remakes be considered classics in the future? Of course. I believe The Ring (2002), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), The Hills Have Eyes (2006), The Last House on the Left (2009) are a few recent remakes that will be considered classics in the future. Oh, I forgot to mention NOES 2010 (not kidding)

[🪦 DarklyScanner ●]

<!--quoteo(post=362680:date=May 16 2010, 10:02 AM:name=DAKAZA)<div class=\'quotetop\'>QUOTE (DAKAZA @ May 16 2010, 10:02 AM) <a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=362680\"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class=\'quotemain\'><!--quotecOf course not? Sorry man, you're wrong. All the remake bashing is really irritating me. The fact of the matter is, some of the greatest horror movies of all time were remakes. Does The Thing (1982) ring a bell? How about The Fly (1986)? Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), The Blob (1988) and NOTLD (1990) also come to mind. These are just a few.Will some of the newer remakes be considered classics in the future? Of course. I believe The Ring (2002), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003), The Hills Have Eyes (2006), The Last House on the Left (2009) are a few recent remakes that will be considered classics in the future. Oh, I forgot to mention NOES 2010 (not kidding)<!--QuoteEnd</div><!--QuoteEEndI love how whenever it's obvious I'm talking about modern remakes, people just feel the need to bring up the Thing or the Fly as if they were made five years ago. I call it the Rob Zombie defense since he used it ad nauseum to defend his awful remake. Those old films couldn't be any farther than the Halloween remake or the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake or this last Nightmare remake. Do you know why? Because they actually were creative movies that took a radically different approach from the original films in good taste. Most of the remakes made today don't have that kind of creativity. That's why the Thing, The Fly, and Body Snatchers are considered good enough to be some of the best horror films. If you compare the Thing to its original counter-part, the question of which is better is unquestionable. The only people I've come across who said Howard Hawks' movie is much better saw it first and usually grew up with it or they called the remake a gross-out movie. The film was actually ahead of its time in terms of effects... nobody got how complex the work actually was. Not to mention, it simply just went back to the source material and adapted it more faithfully. And nobody really considers the NOTLD remake a classic. It's a decent exercise, but besides a few horror fans, who really considers this a mainstay horror classic? It sounds like you're confusing the praise for the original with that one. The Blob's also just a fun movie... a classic? I can maybe go with that, but it's stretching it as it's not even really that good. It's hokey, but in a good way. I think you're being incredibly short sighted by saying most of those films will be classics. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake? Really? Just because a few gore hounds love the hell out of it doesn't mean it's going to be considered a classic all around. There's a reason why the original Nightmare on Elm Street is an American classic. And it goes beyond the kill scenes and effects. It's a very original idea and executed very well for a low budget feature. If you really think the remake will somehow be considered in the same breath, you really don't understand how it works. Just because you consider it a classic, doesn't mean it eventually will be. Look, I love the Way of the Gun and the Mothman Prophecies, but I'm not going to hold my breath that one day they will be considered classic films. It's just not going to happen. I will go on loving them and that's all that will happen.The only film you mentioned that probably will be considered a classic is the Ring. It was pretty good, probably the first and only of the Japanese remakes that succeeded. I think they ruined it by showing the girl's face at the end, but overall, it was done with some creative flair and had a good cast. It's reputation is hurt however by the God awful sequel... it was pure crap. But the Ring remake did set off the remake trend, so it is a bit different than the Hills Have Eyes remake which is just a part of that trend. So yeah, one film out of the five you mentioned. Let's not forget, part of becoming a classic in the vein I'm talking about, is to get recognized outside of horror fans. Because horror fans can say almost anything is a classic. I've heard people say something as cheesy as Prom Night is a classic, but who really believes that?

[🪦 DAKAZA ●]

People will always disagree about what is "classic." There's no objective way to determine exactly what is and what is not classic. The Blob and NOTLD probably weren't the best examples but they came to mind because they're very good remakes. My basic point is that these movies shouldn't be dismissed just because they're remakes. Remakes have been around for a very long time and many have been truly amazing movies. I think we've had quite a few such remakes in the last decade.

[🪦 Mutilated ●]

Maybe they'll do a prequel instead, like with the TCM remake.