CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET Post-Release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET Post-Release - Page 4

post #151 of 193
10/10/10 at 12:17pm
hahahahaha TCM '03 = TOP SHELF
Reply
post #152 of 193
10/10/10 at 1:36pm
You know, I was going to say something about that but I decided to just let it sit there and fester.
Reply
post #153 of 193
10/10/10 at 10:22pm
Compared to some of the remakes I've seen, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake is a work of quality. At least they mixed it up and didn't carbon copy the original. They didn't screw up the "mixing it up" either like that shitty Halloween remake.

I stand by what I said.

Smacking and festering aside, I'm watching it right now, and it's still a middle of the road remake. Except for that Twilight bastard and his beard. We all know they hire people in their 20's to play high schoolers, but this is ridiculous.
Reply
post #154 of 193
10/10/10 at 10:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rene (Mr.Eko) View Post
Compared to some of the remakes I've seen, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake is a work of quality.
Except you compared it to Cronenberg's The Fly and Carpenter's The Thing. This is incorrect.

Quote:
At least they mixed it up and didn't carbon copy the original.
The Rob Zombie defense. Classic move.

Quote:
I'm watching it right now
Are you?

The other reason you're getting a smack is for running out day of release to buy the fucker!
Reply
post #155 of 193
10/10/10 at 10:36pm
I wouldn't have bought it if Target and Wal-mart actually had the Grindhouse Blu-ray set!

It was actually an impulse buy, Phil. I would have eventually bought it, but the lenticular cover, and my zero balance on my Target card told me to buy it.

As you can see from my previous post, I edited it before you posted to fix the "Rob Zombie defense" I realized it right after I posted it. Don't want to be giving him credit. Although I did like his Halloween II. Mostly because it goes batshit insane.

In retrospect I shouldn't have classified it along greats like The Thing, and The Fly, since those 2 are superior remakes. I mostly meant it to be that the TCM remake isn't a travesty like others.
Reply
post #156 of 193
10/11/10 at 12:36am
I'm just fucking with you and your terrible, terrible taste, Rene. I don't intend it as mean.
Reply
post #157 of 193
10/11/10 at 12:46am
It's all good Phil. You know I like just about everything, so even if I like "terrible" movies, there's other genuinely good ones that I really like as well.
Reply
post #158 of 193
10/11/10 at 6:05pm
How would you list the Bay horror productions, Rene?

I'd go for

TCM 03
Friday the 13th 09
The Amityville Horror 05
ANOES 10
TCM: The Beginning
The Hitcher 2007
The Unborn
Horsemen
Reply
post #159 of 193
10/11/10 at 6:10pm
So many bad movies.
Reply
post #160 of 193
10/11/10 at 6:19pm
Fuck it, I actually thought the Friday remake was a blast.
Reply
post #161 of 193
10/11/10 at 6:37pm
Yes, that I will concede, it's a pure F13 film, and fans like myself hadn't had that in a long time. In my eyes it's the only successful PD production b/c it actually understood what it was.
Reply
post #162 of 193
10/11/10 at 6:56pm
I actually saw HORSEMEN. A horrid film. Dennis Quaid looks like he's 70 years old here.
Reply
post #163 of 193
10/11/10 at 7:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Myers View Post
How would you list the Bay horror productions, Rene?

I'd go for

TCM 03
Friday the 13th 09
The Amityville Horror 05
ANOES 10
TCM: The Beginning
The Hitcher 2007
The Unborn
Horsemen
My listing is pretty much the same as yours Chris. Except I would switch The Unborn and Horsemen. They were both pretty shitty, but Horsemen had Dennis Quaid, and Clifton Collins, Jr. Even though The Unborn has James Remar and Gary Oldman, it's still a boring mess. I almost fell asleep watching it.

I just re-watched The Amityville Horror 05 last night, and overall it's one of their better efforts. Plus it wisely downgrades the Priest role and focuses more on the house and the terror it creates.

The Friday The 13th remake is probably their one true fun movie. There's not a moment there that they're trying to truly be scary. Nispel and co. just wanted to make a popcorn fright movie, and succeeded.
Reply
post #164 of 193
10/11/10 at 7:22pm
You need to watch the original Amityville Horror sequel. It goes some places and is fairly underrated.

It's just so ridiculous that even though all of the remakes were hits, there are barely sequels to them.

ANOES: cost 35, made 115
The Amityville Horror: cost 20, made 110
TCM: cost 10, made 110
Friday: cost 20, made 90
TCM II: cost 15, made 50
The Hitcher: cost 30, made 25 (rofl)

Seriously, what I love about all the original Halloweens and Fridays and Hellraisers is the fact that there are so many of them. They may certainly decrease in quality, but still there's much to love about them, for example the guitar kill in Friday 8, Paul Rudd vs Michael Myers or the crazy priest in Poltergeist 2. Sometimes, wait's worth it, see H20 or Jason X, and sometimes. Well, it's fun to see what Zellweger and McConaughey ended up doing before becoming big. Even Saw made it happen, letting VI be the best of them since the second movie.

Even if I wasn't all too happy with all of the Platinum remakes, I'd love to have a new ANOES, a new Amityville Horror, a new Friday, a new Texas and a new Hitcher in the works. Well, maybe not the Hitcher, but all the other ones. 10 m budget and it'll always be wins.
Reply
post #165 of 193
10/11/10 at 7:24pm
There was a Hitcher sequel with Kari Wuher if I recall.
Reply
post #166 of 193
10/11/10 at 7:39pm
That was the dtv sequel to the original with Jake Busey playing some sort of reincarnated Rutger Hauer. It wasn't all too bad, but part of the earlier run. Sean Bean needs a horror franchise. Where's Silent Hill II? Maybe he can slay some more in Black Death Again.
Reply
post #167 of 193
10/11/10 at 7:41pm
The TCM remake was fucking awful.

I like the Friday the 13th remake and would love a sequel with tacky 3D because that's how I like the format presented.

The Nightmare update had a very weak script, but Samuel Bayer didn't do a bad job directing and Jackie Earle Haley elevated the material with his performance.

I didn't see the Hitcher remake, but I would have rather seen it with Clive Owen as Ryder.

Kellan Lutz can suck a cigar.
Reply
post #168 of 193
10/11/10 at 7:44pm
Amityville II: The Possession is pretty good, Chris. I agree that it's underrated. Amityville 3D has a few moments, but it's not as good as the second one, which actually out creeps the original in some parts, all the while turning into an Exorcist ripoff at the end.

It is pretty strange that they haven't belted out any other films, save for the prequel to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre '03. They're not making arty fare. They should just slap a script together in a few weeks and get to filming.
Reply
post #169 of 193
10/12/10 at 8:45am
I'll cop to enjoying AMITYVILLE '05. Reynolds is pretty stupendous in that.
Reply
post #170 of 193
10/12/10 at 10:19am
Eh, I'll fess up and admit to digging the TCM, Amityville Horror and, especially, Friday the 13th reduxes. Haven't caught the new Elm Street, however.
Reply
post #171 of 193
10/12/10 at 5:00pm
Jesus, now we're coming around to the friggin' Amityville remake being good? The original is no great shakes either, but c'mon, Platinum Dunes's version was just loud, dumb and terrible. And fuck Ryan Reynolds. That guy is squandering his potential (aside from BURIED I guess).
At this rate in 3 years the prevailing wisdom will be that the NOES remake was actually good.
Reply
post #172 of 193
10/12/10 at 5:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastian OB View Post
Jesus, now we're coming around to the friggin' Amityville remake being good?
Wait, who said it was good? Because it's not by any stretch of the imagination. Being a sucker for haunted house stories, however, I found it to be a decent way to kill some time (I also found A Haunting in Connecticut to be passable, though). And, honestly, I'd rather watch the remake than the original: Kidder/Brolin/Steiger-power be damned.
Reply
post #173 of 193
10/13/10 at 4:56am
Furry Vengeance is good.
Reply
post #174 of 193
11/3/10 at 11:42am
Caught up on the NOES remake last night. It's a real headscratcher for me. Maybe it was the extraordinarily lowered expectations, but I didn't hate it (and I'm a huge fan of the franchise). At the same time, I find myself struggling to articulate any real positives. Some random musings:

I knew we were probably in for a rough go when the opening credit images featured an image of the pre-school sign, "Badham Pre-School", and then flashed to parts of it being obscured so that it now read, "Bad School". Likewise, the children's blocks that formed the words "Stop" followed by "Pain". OMG, indeed.

Sweet Lord, could Rooney Mara be anymore of a emoteless void?!? I can only characterize her performance as hateful. And it's a shame because the original Nancy was such a fantastic character: Langenkamp projects an air of proactive intelligence and resillience; Mara projects only sub-Kristen Stewart moroseness.

Haley's performance--buried as it was beneath the contents of several dozen silly putty eggs--was decent. There was a malicious and cruelly evil bent to his character that I don't think Englund even brought to the table. Loved the anticipatory whickering of his fingerblades. That being said, he simply does not have the physical stature--either in height or build (and, yes, I realize that Englund isn't exactly Derek Mears)--to bring the menace: there's simply a different energy when Freddy is no bigger than the teens he's slicing up.

One thing that's always bothered me: Freddy's ability to manipulate objects in the real world. During the pharmacy sequence, we have Freddy knocking stuff off of the shelves. How? Because Nancy is having a micro-nap? It makes no sense that he would be able to do so. Wouldn't he constantly be attacking teens in the real world, as well? Then again, the original film did have Freddy hanging Rod in his jail cell.

I really dug the scene in which Nancy investigated into the fates of the other pre-schoolers. It was a really great touch, including the Asian Dude's video blog, although the film makers couldn't restrain themselves from showing his demise, as well. Apparently, in the remake, Freddy's operating on a national scale.

Eh, I've got a bunch of other thoughts running around about the film. I'm not sure there worth the bandwidth, however. I will say that I would be curious to see where a sequel would go. I'm morbidly curious like that, I guess.
Reply
post #175 of 193
11/3/10 at 11:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattioli View Post
Sweet Lord, could Rooney Mara be anymore of a emoteless void?!?
Fincher must see something in her the rest of us don't. For the sake of the Dragon Tattoo remake, I'd love to believe she's a dynamic talent just waiting for the right role. I'd also love to believe in unicorns.
Reply
post #176 of 193
11/3/10 at 1:09pm
She's good in THE SOCIAL NETWORK. Real purty too.
Reply
post #177 of 193
11/3/10 at 2:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattioli View Post
Caught up on the NOES remake last night. It's a real headscratcher for me. Maybe it was the extraordinarily lowered expectations, but I didn't hate it (and I'm a huge fan of the franchise). At the same time, I find myself struggling to articulate any real positives. Some random musings:

I knew we were probably in for a rough go when the opening credit images featured an image of the pre-school sign, "Badham Pre-School", and then flashed to parts of it being obscured so that it now read, "Bad School". Likewise, the children's blocks that formed the words "Stop" followed by "Pain". OMG, indeed.

Sweet Lord, could Rooney Mara be anymore of a emoteless void?!? I can only characterize her performance as hateful. And it's a shame because the original Nancy was such a fantastic character: Langenkamp projects an air of proactive intelligence and resillience; Mara projects only sub-Kristen Stewart moroseness.

Haley's performance--buried as it was beneath the contents of several dozen silly putty eggs--was decent. There was a malicious and cruelly evil bent to his character that I don't think Englund even brought to the table. Loved the anticipatory whickering of his fingerblades. That being said, he simply does not have the physical stature--either in height or build (and, yes, I realize that Englund isn't exactly Derek Mears)--to bring the menace: there's simply a different energy when Freddy is no bigger than the teens he's slicing up.

One thing that's always bothered me: Freddy's ability to manipulate objects in the real world. During the pharmacy sequence, we have Freddy knocking stuff off of the shelves. How? Because Nancy is having a micro-nap? It makes no sense that he would be able to do so. Wouldn't he constantly be attacking teens in the real world, as well? Then again, the original film did have Freddy hanging Rod in his jail cell.

I really dug the scene in which Nancy investigated into the fates of the other pre-schoolers. It was a really great touch, including the Asian Dude's video blog, although the film makers couldn't restrain themselves from showing his demise, as well. Apparently, in the remake, Freddy's operating on a national scale.

Eh, I've got a bunch of other thoughts running around about the film. I'm not sure there worth the bandwidth, however. I will say that I would be curious to see where a sequel would go. I'm morbidly curious like that, I guess.
Yeah finally saw it because Netflix dind't release it until yesterday but I will not I repeat will not break down and go to a Blockbuster just to get a new release.

Odd for me the opening credits were one of the only things I actually liked.

I agree with you on Nancy. By dragging out the Chris storyline we don't meet Nancy until it's too late to learn anything about her. Although I will KIND OF give them points for attempting to make the audience think that Chris would be the new hero girl.

Haley was fine but what was he given to work with really? He was offing people much too fast asn always with the glove. Seriously in a movie like thisyou have to switch it up. Especially when you have this whole really cool dreamscape to play with. I mean this motherfucker bends reality!

Yeah liked the blog too. Although it's not so much that he operates internationally. He isn't offing random kids, they are all in that picture. Apparently long before the guy in the diner he was killing kids from that picture who had apprently moved away from Springwood. He just made all 3 of them look like an accident. The problem with the blog though is....who posted it when he was killed on cam? Also not sure why Freddy went from natural casuses deaths to grily Supernatural shit but thats just promblem 100 with this film.

im not looking toward a sequel but if they did perhaps they could explore micronaps and do something cooler with it. The whole film just felt so boring to me. All of the main events happen but they happen so fast with none of the atmosphere and scares. Also ya think maybe when your planing to pull a monster from your dreams that maybe you prepare for him a bit better? If emo kid hasn't found that papper cutter thing 2 seconds before she went under they would be massively fucked. Oh and that secreat room they went to. Emo kid asks Clancy if they ever found the secret cave thing and he says no. Yet within 5 seconds of entering the school they find the thing in the bsement. Guess they didn't look THAT hard.
Reply
post #178 of 193
11/7/10 at 3:02am
Finally saw this. I can say that Haley was good as Freddy but he deserved a better movie to be in.
Reply
post #179 of 193
11/7/10 at 1:50pm
Redboxed this last night. Fell asleep and returned it without finishing. My god that was horrible.

*EDIT* I knew it was going to be bad when they showed the dream world in the diner sequence with the light change. I'd like to somewhat wonder for a few minutes if the character is awake or dreaming. Don't switch to eerie lighting so blatantly.

*EDIT 2*

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
Anyone else annoyed by the decision to have two sets of opening credits: one set of stylish, clever playground chalk scribbles, along with a neighboring set of standard superimposed, traditional ones...you know, just so we could follow along? Sheesh.
Actually that was probably when I realized this was going to suck. I kept gritting my teeth thinking how effective the credits would have been with simply chalk drawings vs. the Bad School, HELL blocks and traditional lettering.

I want my dollar back, Michael Bay.
Reply
post #180 of 193
11/13/10 at 3:27pm
I saw this earlier in the week. I got really bored after about 15 minutes, because the film seemed to be trying desperately hard (with editing, color timing, music ETC) to make EVERYTHING so scary that in the end nothing was scary

It all just seemed kind of silly and trite, and it was so oppressively gloomy that I had no patience for the unlikable leads. They're constantly at each others throats and it's just a chore to watch

I was mostly curious to see Freddy Kruger, a character I've always heard about but never seen before. I basically just ended up skipping through the movie for the parts where he shows up. JEH did great work, and I for one found him to be genuinely frightening. I know the old Freddy was more campy or something and some people feel sad that vision of the character got left behind, but this one seemed literally psychotic and I was really disturbed by his portrayal. He felt dangerous, and it made his screen time pretty gripping. By the end of the movie, I was convinced that JEH had turned in one of the best horror performances of the decade, it's too bad that the film itself was such dreck

PS The dream settings were totally under utilized. The sequences in the film have little to do with how dreams actually feel. The real world was shot in such a spooky manner that there was no contrast with the dream world, an d the dream settings and tricks were so pedestrian. If I'd made it, it would be like an actual dream where objects change shape and size, doors you're trying to escape through become crawl spaces when you turn back around, and the dream settings evolve (meaning they change slowly and inexplicably from one thing to another) instead of just having a bunch of slam cuts to new locations

Dreams are hella weird, but somehow in Michael Bay's world they're only slightly more off kilter than reality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matches_Malone View Post
God that picture of Haley is awful. It looks like the bastard child of Vincent and Plastic-surgery cat lady.
I found his face and the angle of his eyes to be really upsetting. His character unnerved me

EDIT: I'd like to have seen the resolution have more to do with actual lucid dream techniques. I used to have lucid nightmares, and I developed ways to wake myself up from them. This usually involved (in part) realizing some truth that changed the power dynamic between myself and whatever was bothering me. In this movie I'd have loved for the girl to have at the last minute turned around to Freddy, and laughed right in his face. He can scare people in their dreams all he wants, but what he most wants (to hurt people in the real world) is no longer possible because she exposed him. She got him burned to death, and dream revenge is now the only kind available to him. She won and defeated Freddy years ago, and he's just pathetically trying to convince her otherwise as if he still holds some power. She should have pointed out that she was his nightmare, and she'd already fucked him over far worse than he'd ever be able to do in a dream (my take)

I would have found that a more emotionally satisfying conclusion than "Now you're real and stabbed! Take that!" lol
Reply
post #181 of 193
12/4/11 at 2:47pm

   I saw this last week on HBO. I didn't think it was bad; it sure as hell wasn't good. Granted I didn't pay a dime to see it, so that helped. The HBO is a free 3 month  deal. I think they should have went the Freddy was wrongly accused route.  Maybe have one of the parents be the molester and he framed Freddy to save his own neck. The parents then would be reaping what they sowed.

 

   I enjoyed the Friday the 13Th remake. I wanted to see tits and entertaining deaths, and I got them. The tool screaming like a little girl was a nice touch. I watched it twice and I have no desire to see it again, but I don't feel that I wasted my money.

Reply
post #182 of 193
12/4/11 at 5:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaz View Post

   I saw this last week on HBO. I didn't think it was bad; it sure as hell wasn't good. Granted I didn't pay a dime to see it, so that helped. 

Well, I think that's my issue with remakes as a whole. They are at the very best, mediocre. If you're going to dust off this franchise and give it a new angle, come up with something worth watching. If you're just gonna update the same formula with weaker execution, make another fucking sequel. If you're trying to make a cheap buck off your franchise. Stick Robert Englund back in the make-up chair and make some money. If you're gonna do a remake, come up with a fucking idea. These remakes always end up being a few good ideas mixed in with about a hundred shitty ones, a few good-looking shots, and a crummy-ass script. And while we're on the subject, I'm tired of the "If I didn't do it, some other director would have" excuse. That logic has never kept a crack dealer out of prison and most of those guys have less money than Michael Bay so fuck Platinum Dunes.

Reply
post #183 of 193
12/5/11 at 3:22am

You know i never understood why we are not getting another Friday installment. The Reboot was successfull financially and critically from where i heard.

Reply
post #184 of 193
12/5/11 at 8:57pm

If you do want to see a remake I highly recommend  Fright Night 2011.

Reply
post #185 of 193
12/13/11 at 4:55pm

I dispassionately recommend it. None of the performances are bad, but Farrell is the only actor who manages to elevate an incredibly boring screenplay.

Reply
post #186 of 193
12/13/11 at 6:20pm

But that's Farrell's gift, he's consistantly a guy I want to see in better movies.

Reply
post #187 of 193
12/13/11 at 9:52pm

I liked Tennant a lot too. His Peter Vincent was what the 10th Doctor would be like if he was a tool.

Reply
post #188 of 193
12/14/11 at 11:19am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega View Post

But that's Farrell's gift, he's consistantly a guy I want to see in better movies.

 

I know a lot of the actors/actresses with that particular gift and it is always painfully depressing to watch their talents wasted with mediocre product.

 

 

Reply
post #189 of 193
12/14/11 at 3:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy Jim View Post

 

I know a lot of the actors/actresses with that particular gift and it is always painfully depressing to watch their talents wasted with mediocre product.

 

 


This line makes me wonder about the acting talent of Rooney Mara. She's horrible in this movie but this is the only thing I have seen her in. We all know she's been cast in Fincher's Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. So more knowledgeable chewers, is she talented or has Fincher gone nuts?    

 

Reply
post #190 of 193
12/14/11 at 3:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbrother View Post


This line makes me wonder about the acting talent of Rooney Mara. She's horrible in this movie but this is the only thing I have seen her in. We all know she's been cast in Fincher's Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. So more knowledgeable chewers, is she talented or has Fincher gone nuts?    

 


Do yourself a favor and watch The Social Network. 

Reply
post #191 of 193
12/31/11 at 2:31pm

Even Rooney Mara hated it.

 

Quote:
Mara told EW the 2010 remake was a role she didn't really want. "And then I went in [to audition] and I was like, "F**k, I definitely got that," she says.
 
I didn't want to act anymore. I was like, This isn't what I signed up for. If this is what my opportunities are going to be like, then I'm not that interested in acting. So I was very discouraged and disheartened. And then I got the Social Network script. That kind of inspired me."

 

 

 

 

Reply
post #192 of 193
12/31/11 at 2:57pm

Pretty standard post-critical acceptance "I'm respectable now" stuff. Not that I doubt she doesn't mean it on some level, but I'm sure she did press for that fucking junk like a burning bush personally delivered the script to her.

 

Reply
post #193 of 193
12/31/11 at 3:30pm


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess Kate View Post

I saw this earlier in the week. I got really bored after about 15 minutes, because the film seemed to be trying desperately hard (with editing, color timing, music ETC) to make EVERYTHING so scary that in the end nothing was scary

It all just seemed kind of silly and trite, and it was so oppressively gloomy that I had no patience for the unlikable leads. They're constantly at each others throats and it's just a chore to watch

I was mostly curious to see Freddy Kruger, a character I've always heard about but never seen before. I basically just ended up skipping through the movie for the parts where he shows up. JEH did great work, and I for one found him to be genuinely frightening. I know the old Freddy was more campy or something and some people feel sad that vision of the character got left behind, but this one seemed literally psychotic and I was really disturbed by his portrayal. He felt dangerous, and it made his screen time pretty gripping. By the end of the movie, I was convinced that JEH had turned in one of the best horror performances of the decade, it's too bad that the film itself was such dreck

PS The dream settings were totally under utilized. The sequences in the film have little to do with how dreams actually feel. The real world was shot in such a spooky manner that there was no contrast with the dream world, an d the dream settings and tricks were so pedestrian. If I'd made it, it would be like an actual dream where objects change shape and size, doors you're trying to escape through become crawl spaces when you turn back around, and the dream settings evolve (meaning they change slowly and inexplicably from one thing to another) instead of just having a bunch of slam cuts to new locations

Dreams are hella weird, but somehow in Michael Bay's world they're only slightly more off kilter than reality

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matches_Malone View Post
God that picture of Haley is awful. It looks like the bastard child of Vincent and Plastic-surgery cat lady.
I found his face and the angle of his eyes to be really upsetting. His character unnerved me

EDIT: I'd like to have seen the resolution have more to do with actual lucid dream techniques. I used to have lucid nightmares, and I developed ways to wake myself up from them. This usually involved (in part) realizing some truth that changed the power dynamic between myself and whatever was bothering me. In this movie I'd have loved for the girl to have at the last minute turned around to Freddy, and laughed right in his face. He can scare people in their dreams all he wants, but what he most wants (to hurt people in the real world) is no longer possible because she exposed him. She got him burned to death, and dream revenge is now the only kind available to him. She won and defeated Freddy years ago, and he's just pathetically trying to convince her otherwise as if he still holds some power. She should have pointed out that she was his nightmare, and she'd already fucked him over far worse than he'd ever be able to do in a dream (my take)

I would have found that a more emotionally satisfying conclusion than "Now you're real and stabbed! Take that!" lol


Agreed about being bored. I really can't comment on the rest because after seeing the overly digitally graded first act borrowing the EXACT beats from the original, I gave up.

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET Post-Release