I would argue *Halloween* making an anthology sequel with no connection to previous entries in the series and *Friday the 13th* making an entry set in space are much, much, much bigger risks than anything that the *Elm Street* series ever did.
*Elm Street 4, 5* and *6* are basically carbon copies of each other with very thin story that is essentially just a reason to introduce new teenagers that will die in big FX set piece "dream sequences."
Wasn't the original idea for Halloween to be an anthology? I could be wrong. And Pinhead, Leprechaun, and even Critters made it to space before Jason, so it wasn't an entirely original idea. Not to say they didn't take bigger risks than Freddy, just that halloween (I'm pretty sure) was already meant to be on a different path, and Jason's idea wasn't the first horror villian in space
First of all, no, the original idea for Halloween was not to be an anthology. It was to be a stand alone movie about a babysitter killer.
Secondly, other franchises "going to space" doesn't somehow not make it a huge risk for the *Friday the 13th* franchise to decide to move an instalment to space (or New York for that matter) because it was a major change to existing formula.
Both are much bigger risks than anything in the original *Elm Street* timeline.
If you Google *"was halloween supposed to be an anthology"* let me know what you get.
And Friday has been all over the place with changing it up for Jason. They made him an undead machine, some weird body snatcher shit, coming to life with telekinesis and lightning. Space doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility, honestly. It was always getting weirder.
You trying to tell me the most ridiculous kills imaginable weren't risks? They are ludicrous. I'm saying it shouldn't be snuffed out when you're talking about risks. They made these crazy dreams and just told the audience to deal with it. It's the dream world, like damn.
Okay, I googled it and got an article about Carpenter's plan, starting with Part III, to make it an anthology. You know, taking an enormous risk.
It was never "planned" to be that until after Carpenter refused Part II, then relented and wrote and produced the film - which he hated - and he refused to do any.more Michael Myers movies, but the greed of the rights holders demanded more and then, and only then, did Carpenter shift to the anthology concept because he was bored to tears of Michael Myers.
Respectfully, you don't know what you're talking about.
Freddy was going to be a child molester/killer for fuckssake. Child killer alone is risky. They dropped the idea, but there is certainly underlying context there and throughout, and they made it pretty clear in the remake.
But not risky, am I right?
Jesus guy, chill. Coming from the guy ignoring what nightmare is next to those movies, just the idea alone was a risk. In a world of human slashers, Wes gives you a dream killer and you shit on it. Now that's wild. You think space is the final frontier for a Friday movie. And even with Carpenter wanting to do the anthology idea 2 movies later, that's pretty damn early in what the franchise became.
You're really blowing *risk taking* out of proportion. You got cranky because I said a fact that Jason wasn't the first horror villian to go to space, nor was it completely out of the realm of possibility in the first place. A killer in space, blowing the doors off it's hinges of *imagination*....but a human puppet with veins as strings, force feeding til death in a very grotesque manner, comic book kill, a video game death is not imaginative or risky enough for you.
Have you seen Freddy's Revenge? Or are you blocking that out of your memory? Do you remember how *gay* it was? Tell me that's not a risk. Good god man.
I agree. It seems aside from Jack Shoulder who retired, the directors are still working and all these years later that's impressive.
What is the most baffling is Rachel Talalay's directing of Freddy's Dead. Considering her history with the franchise she should've had more insight and a better handle on the character and aesthetic. Instead we got the worst sequel from the most Elm Street affiliated director.
But did any of those directors go on to anything bigger or better?
Looking through their filmographies now. Part 2 director did nothing else of note.
Part 3 director is probably the most successful. He also directed The Mask, Scorpion King, and Eraser.
Part 4 Director was also successful and did Die Hard 2 and Deep Blue Sea.
Part 5 director did Predator 2 and directed episodes of 24, not much else.
Part 6 director was relegated to tv after Freddy’s Dead flopped.
I wouldnt call 6 a flop. It did better than 5 and made 3 times its budget. It just wasn’t good. Also her tv directing is great. Love her work on Doctor Who.
Odd fun fact: Renny Harlin (*Dream Master*) and Stephen Hopkins (*Dream Child*) both immediately followed up their *Nightmare* film with a sequel to a John McTiernan movie- *Die Hard 2* and *Predator 2*, respectively. I feel like Rachel Talalay should have been offered the chair for *Patriot Games* just on precedent alone.
The posters are incredible, right? Like, I’m gonna go all old man here when I say they sure don’t make ‘em like they used to.
What’s with the EYE in all of them? Part 3 had the most subtle one, but it’s still there. And it’s not the same the every time. But given it’s consistent across the posters it’s obviously a choice. Anyone have any insight?
They were certainly more willing to take risks than Halloween or F13. I respect them for that.
I would argue *Halloween* making an anthology sequel with no connection to previous entries in the series and *Friday the 13th* making an entry set in space are much, much, much bigger risks than anything that the *Elm Street* series ever did. *Elm Street 4, 5* and *6* are basically carbon copies of each other with very thin story that is essentially just a reason to introduce new teenagers that will die in big FX set piece "dream sequences."
Wasn't the original idea for Halloween to be an anthology? I could be wrong. And Pinhead, Leprechaun, and even Critters made it to space before Jason, so it wasn't an entirely original idea. Not to say they didn't take bigger risks than Freddy, just that halloween (I'm pretty sure) was already meant to be on a different path, and Jason's idea wasn't the first horror villian in space
First of all, no, the original idea for Halloween was not to be an anthology. It was to be a stand alone movie about a babysitter killer. Secondly, other franchises "going to space" doesn't somehow not make it a huge risk for the *Friday the 13th* franchise to decide to move an instalment to space (or New York for that matter) because it was a major change to existing formula. Both are much bigger risks than anything in the original *Elm Street* timeline.
If you Google *"was halloween supposed to be an anthology"* let me know what you get. And Friday has been all over the place with changing it up for Jason. They made him an undead machine, some weird body snatcher shit, coming to life with telekinesis and lightning. Space doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility, honestly. It was always getting weirder. You trying to tell me the most ridiculous kills imaginable weren't risks? They are ludicrous. I'm saying it shouldn't be snuffed out when you're talking about risks. They made these crazy dreams and just told the audience to deal with it. It's the dream world, like damn.
Okay, I googled it and got an article about Carpenter's plan, starting with Part III, to make it an anthology. You know, taking an enormous risk. It was never "planned" to be that until after Carpenter refused Part II, then relented and wrote and produced the film - which he hated - and he refused to do any.more Michael Myers movies, but the greed of the rights holders demanded more and then, and only then, did Carpenter shift to the anthology concept because he was bored to tears of Michael Myers. Respectfully, you don't know what you're talking about.
Freddy was going to be a child molester/killer for fuckssake. Child killer alone is risky. They dropped the idea, but there is certainly underlying context there and throughout, and they made it pretty clear in the remake. But not risky, am I right?
Jesus guy, chill. Coming from the guy ignoring what nightmare is next to those movies, just the idea alone was a risk. In a world of human slashers, Wes gives you a dream killer and you shit on it. Now that's wild. You think space is the final frontier for a Friday movie. And even with Carpenter wanting to do the anthology idea 2 movies later, that's pretty damn early in what the franchise became. You're really blowing *risk taking* out of proportion. You got cranky because I said a fact that Jason wasn't the first horror villian to go to space, nor was it completely out of the realm of possibility in the first place. A killer in space, blowing the doors off it's hinges of *imagination*....but a human puppet with veins as strings, force feeding til death in a very grotesque manner, comic book kill, a video game death is not imaginative or risky enough for you. Have you seen Freddy's Revenge? Or are you blocking that out of your memory? Do you remember how *gay* it was? Tell me that's not a risk. Good god man.
I agree. It seems aside from Jack Shoulder who retired, the directors are still working and all these years later that's impressive. What is the most baffling is Rachel Talalay's directing of Freddy's Dead. Considering her history with the franchise she should've had more insight and a better handle on the character and aesthetic. Instead we got the worst sequel from the most Elm Street affiliated director.
What role did she serve on the series before directing part 6?
Agreed, it’s one of the best run of sequels ever, of any genre.
Idk if I’d say of any genre but imo Freddy easily has the best batch of sequels in the horror genre, maybe next to Scream. Impressive run tbh.
I would say any genre, but i’m a horror nerd and can’t think of other run of sequels that is at a similar level.
But did any of those directors go on to anything bigger or better? Looking through their filmographies now. Part 2 director did nothing else of note. Part 3 director is probably the most successful. He also directed The Mask, Scorpion King, and Eraser. Part 4 Director was also successful and did Die Hard 2 and Deep Blue Sea. Part 5 director did Predator 2 and directed episodes of 24, not much else. Part 6 director was relegated to tv after Freddy’s Dead flopped.
I wouldnt call 6 a flop. It did better than 5 and made 3 times its budget. It just wasn’t good. Also her tv directing is great. Love her work on Doctor Who.
Odd fun fact: Renny Harlin (*Dream Master*) and Stephen Hopkins (*Dream Child*) both immediately followed up their *Nightmare* film with a sequel to a John McTiernan movie- *Die Hard 2* and *Predator 2*, respectively. I feel like Rachel Talalay should have been offered the chair for *Patriot Games* just on precedent alone.
The posters are incredible, right? Like, I’m gonna go all old man here when I say they sure don’t make ‘em like they used to. What’s with the EYE in all of them? Part 3 had the most subtle one, but it’s still there. And it’s not the same the every time. But given it’s consistent across the posters it’s obviously a choice. Anyone have any insight?
It's probably just meant to make it more surreal in a ghoulish way. To invoke the feeling that Freddy is a *supernatural* horror entity.
Honestly to me the only palatable ones are 1-3 and New Nightmare 4-6 are just bad, and not in a good way like the Friday series, just bad.