Elm Street: The First Murders...

[Guest Ram]

The best way would be to portray Freddy starting out his murders methodically and quietly, kind of clumsy maybe and very paranoid about being caught. Have him evolve throughout into becoming more arrogant about not being caught and start cracking jokes, as he feels invincible and powerful (even though he really isn't yet). Eventually, he gets burned to death, and you can segue into NOES1 or something else.

 

I'd like it, but it really wouldn't fit the slasher genre that Freddy is in. I'm not sure it would work.

 

But then, I doubt this would even get off the drawing board.

[Nighthawk 0]

Vs was a success, which means we're probably going to get a lot more slasher stuff, and a lot more Freddy and Jason stuff. I'm sure Jason will continue as he has been for the past 20 years, which is great, that's what I want. I'll admit that a psychological Freddy flick is risking backlash, but if it's ever going to get done, do it now. You can get away with stuff like that while the genre is hot. Look at Friday the 13th V, the fans hated it, but they made it, and the series kept chugging along. Slasher franchises are nothing if not durable.

[Guest Lethargic]

They should get Takashi Miike to direct a Freddy or Jason movie. America would love that stuff.

[Guest JMA]

I think Freddy murdering the little girl at the beginning was a step in the right direction. He even licked her photo sexually. I also don't think they should include the wife and daughter from Freddy's Dead, myself. Freddy strikes me a creepy loner. Why the hell would he ever get married (let alone have kids)?

[Guest Lethargic]

I think Freddy murdering the little girl at the beginning was a step in the right direction. He even licked her photo sexually. I also don't think they should include the wife and daughter from Freddy's Dead, myself. Freddy strikes me a creepy loner. Why the hell would he ever get married (let alone have kids)?

He's probably insane, you know, like ANYBODY that gets married.

[Guest Big_Jay101]

I dont think he was licking her photo sexually...everyone in the theater did. I mean it did look like it, but it was the back of the photo and he was licking it to stick it in the album

[Nighthawk 0]

They were trying to make you think it was sexual and then you realize it wasn't, but I think most would miss it. Freddy hasn't crossed the sex border with the kids (though he definately has with the teens), and there's some tension about whether he did or he didn't. Playing off of that, I think.

[Gert T 0]

I pretty much agree with everyone who says there is no way, they would even think about showing the death of children, but maybe they could get away with doing it like Frailty, which I believe did not actually show any of the murders. Showing Freddy's face, while commiting the murder and maybe have blood land somewhere would be disturbing, but probably acceptable.

[Guest El Satanico]

I pretty much agree with everyone who says there is no way, they would even think about showing the death of children, but maybe they could get away with doing it like Frailty, which I believe did not actually show any of the murders. Showing Freddy's face, while commiting the murder and maybe have blood land somewhere would be disturbing, but probably acceptable.

That's a trick horror has been doing for a long time.

[Corey_Lazarus 0]

And I'm sick of it. I don't want to be teased, I want bloodshed. If the title of the movie has "massacre," "blood," "murder," or whatever in it, I want gore, and plenty of it.

 

I think a neat trick would be starting to show the face with the blood hitting it, and then show the ACTUAL killing. Bait n' switch, but worth it.

 

This idea does intrigue me. However, a lot of the questions posed by fans can be answered in Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, but that movie sucked, so I don't particularly care otherwise.

[Guest Black Tiger]

I think the movie would have to put the actual murders on the back burner in favor of developing Freddy's character as an actual person. For instance, the first scene would have to be Amanda Kruger being locked in the mental institution, maybe even just re-use the scene from part 5 without the actual dialogue about "why is this happening again?" and possibly use a voice over from the nun in part 3 giving the story of Amanda Kruger being raped.

 

Then maybe take us into his childhood (not the drizzling shit in Freddy's Dead) and teen years where he begins to suffer from his infatuation with children. Or in a cool twist Freddy actually trying to see help from a pyschiatirst, and finally becoming the Springwood Slasher and ending with him being set on fire.

 

One thing that would be so neat would be if Freddy first starts just with kids who live in house 1428 Elm St (he made some comment in F vs J about having a thing for that house) and then gradually moves on to other kids, and then finally moves in to the house himself.

 

The wife and kid could even be worked into the movie as well. The wife tries to help him (before he goes on his spree) and the daughter is a way for him to try to cure his sickness. Of course it has no effect and he kills his wife after she finds out what he's been up to.

[Guest JMA]

I don't really see why he shouldn't be able to kill young children. Why should it be more okay to kill teens and adults? I know, I know, there is a stigma about kids being innocent and all. Too bad. Freddy is a CHILD murderer. He kills children and burns their corpses in a boiler room. That's who he is. To dumb it down would be insulting to the audience. F vs. J has gotten back on track with the Freddy character.

[Guest Lethargic]

I just find a very big difference in perception between a crazy demon ghost guy that kills people in their dreams by doing things totally over the top goofy stuff and a real human being that makes a glove of razor blade fingers, brings little girls into his boiler room and then chops them up with it. They can get by with the first because it's over the top sillyness, the second one is not.

[Shanghai Kid 0]

No chance they could get away with showing innocent children being hacked and burned. Too much backlash there, and Freddy fans wouldn't like it. If they do this movie, it should be after they're completely done using the Freddy character.

[Guest Big_Jay101]

Actually Freddy did Cross the Sex Border. If you watch The Dream Child closely enogh when there is newspapers it sasy Chil Molester. They never really say it aloud but it is on the newspaper.

There would be no need for him to jsut kill at 1428 Elm St. He meant he had a thing for those whores because Nancy and her mom lived there and Monica Keena's charachter and her mom. This movie would be a real good idea becuase the first scene of F vs J is prolly wanna of my fave behind the fight scenes. it has a good creepy feel to it. But i think it should come after the sequels. Go ahead and Do F vs J II before England don't wanna put on the make up again. He has confirmed a sequel. But i read a good script for the prequel i got some of it on my pc but it's really good but i think they should go with His childhood up until he makes the deal and it shows years and dates and then it hits like 1980(setting of original) and it says Never Sleep Again at the end.

[Guest El Satanico]

How would not showing graphic footage of a murder dumb a movie down?

 

It can be an intelligent and frightening film without showing blood soaked footage of young girls being sliced up.

[HellSpawn 0]

Im OK for the Nightmare Episode 1.

Just 2 things...

 

- I think they could try to use the name FRED Krueger over Freddy, that way could be more Evil, Freddy is like a friendly name.

 

- I think/remember he not only Killed kids, way back when he was human, but he became a Child Killer as a VENGEANCE against the Fathers that burned him.

 

And about Explicit VS Hidden.

 

I think hidden is better, for example, Silence was some kind of graphic but not really explicit, and was a great movie, Hannibal... it was explicit almost gore and IMO was awful.

[Nighthawk 0]

Actually, I think he was only refered to as Fred in NOES, except for one line where he says "Come to Freddy." I'm not 100% on that though.

[Gert T 0]

How would not showing graphic footage of a murder dumb a movie down?

 

It can be an intelligent and frightening film without showing blood soaked footage of young girls being sliced up.

Agreed, and yeah it wasn't like Frailty was an innovator, just the only movie I could think of at the time.

[Guest Black Tiger]

There is one thing I don't exactly understand. In Freddy's Dead. Freddy says that he took his revenge after his daughter was taken away from him, but at the same time Freddy killed his own wife for snooping in his "special work"

 

Am I missing something or is this a complete contradiction?

[Guest JMA]

I just find a very big difference in perception between a crazy demon ghost guy that kills people in their dreams by doing things totally over the top goofy stuff and a real human being that makes a glove of razor blade fingers, brings little girls into his boiler room and then chops them up with it. They can get by with the first because it's over the top sillyness, the second one is not.

Freddy shouldn't kill teens using "goofy" stuff. Many of the deaths were ironic, but not all were goofy (that came later). No NOES movie should be portrayed as silly. It's a HORROR movie about someone who KILLS you in your dreams. I, for one, think Freddy fans would enjoy seeing his darker moments.

[Guest El Satanico]

There is one thing I don't exactly understand. In Freddy's Dead. Freddy says that he took his revenge after his daughter was taken away from him, but at the same time Freddy killed his own wife for snooping in his "special work"

 

Am I missing something or is this a complete contradiction?

He cared about his daughter more than his wife.

 

Given his obsession with young girls, it's not surprising.

[SpikeFayeJettEdBebop 0]

They should get Takashi Miike to direct a Freddy or Jason movie. America would love that stuff.

America may love it but there is NO way his shit would make it without getting an NC-17. That uy does some FUCKED UP SHIT~! Other than that, I would love to see a prequel. I think they should do something smart, and different. It should bring in the same audience just for the fact that its FREDDY,and anew audience because it would be SMARTER and not just a slasher. They should make it a VERY dark film. Nothing funny about it, something that will be completely realistic, and if it is realistic, there you go, that's half of the formula for scaring the shit out of ANYONE.

 

Freddy+Dark+Realistic=SCARY AS SHIT

 

What they need to do is do this BEFORE F vs. J II because, if they do do it that way, Frddy will be truly scary once again. If they want to show TONS of blood in the prequel....GREAT, just make it realistic. Realistic almost always=Scary.Anyway,back to the second topic. If Freddy is actually scary AGAIN in F vs. J II I think it would add alot to the film..No matter what they do with F vs. J 2 they shoudl deinatly make the Freddy prequel very realistic. There is no reason not too. I like the NOES movies and im all for making it completely realistic and different. If no one else that likes slashers wants to see the Freddy Prequel then thats just stupid......EVERYONE, no matter what you like, should watch things that are diffrernt, I think the realiy would get it a lot of good reviews from critics which would again, bring in more of an audience, possible for F vs. J 2. Another reason to do the preq. before Fvs. J 2, just so that there is a HuGE ASS audience involved.

[converge241 0]

id rather see more backstory on the demon referred to in "new Nightmare" that just used Kreuger as a vessel or "version"

[Slickster 0]

I'd love to see it, but I don't think that they would be able to get a lot of support for a full 90-minute movie about a child killer. I think this would work better as a >60min short film, not a major studio release.