This Is Not a Remake

According a plot summary on imdb, the new re-envisioning of "A Nightmare on Elm Street" is not a re-make. Director Samuel Bayer's "Nightmare" is a modern retelling of Wes Craven's original with its own twists and turns thrown into the mix. The second trailer of Bayer's film gives the audience a peek at what's in store.

After viewing the trailer a few times, there are several references to both the original "Nightmare" and also "Nightmare" part 2. Freddy's image can be seen pushing through the walls of Nancy's bedroom, Tina (Kris in the new film) is seen in a bloody body bag, and a character falls from the second story of a house at a pool party (seen in the first trailer).

Bayer's "Nightmare" doesn't seem to be forsaking Craven's idea of Freddy Krueger, and that's a really good thing. If these trailers are any indication, he seems to be very respectful and humble towards Craven's Krueger; which die-hard "Nightmare" fans should love. Sure, the new Freddy (played by Watchmen's Jackie Earle Haley) has a more human resemblance and his voice is less computer enhanced, but Haley's Krueger is still just as sinister.

Long-time fans of the "Nightmare" series will complain that Robert Englund will always be Freddy Krueger, and that Michael Bay and Platinum Dunes (who produced the new film), should have used Englund for the role--there will always be people like that. If a true fan can watch these trailers and notice the level of detail put into each scene, and the references and hints taken from Craven's original, it will be apparent that Bayer is on to something. Quite possibly that he shares the same respect for Robert Englund's Freddy as the fans do.

Don't write off this new "Nightmare" as just another way for Hollywood execs to make more money, think of it as a fan making a "Nightmare" flick for fans.

The Sci-Fi (I mean SyFy) Channel Needs Some Serious Help

I have fond memories of watching cool sc-fi and scary movies on the Sci-Fi Channel. Their programming consisted of really fun TV shows, like "The Outer Limits," the original spin-off series for "Stargate," and some classic horror and sci-fi movies. The channel was full of imagination and creativity that would inspire any kid to want to write his/her own story with fantastical creatures. The Sc-Fi Channel was full of great material that sci-fi and horror fans alike could enjoy, and then the worst happened...

In 2009, the Sci-Fi Channel decided to change its name to SyFy. They replaced their planetary logo with a simplified (and kindergarten-ish, see picture on left) logo that really doesn't do a good job at representing the programming on the channel. Secondly, they changed the spelling of "sc-fi" to "SyFy." Why the heck would you do such a thing? The universal acronym for "science fiction" is "sci-fi," not "SYFY!" Not only was their logo different, their programming was also changing. SyFy's shows cover a lot of ground (not really a good thing for Sci-Fi or horror fans). The channel's like a TLC for a tiny niche that many people would be embarrassed to admit to being a part of.

I suppose only time will tell if the new SyFy (channel) will be as successful as its predecessor. I don't hate the channel, but I wish that they would have kept their logo and some of their classic programming. I can definitely do without the lazy "Ghost Hunters" show and its many variations. I must admit though, I do enjoy laughing at the SyFy original movies like "Ice Spiders" and "Sharks In Venice." Where else could you watch movies like that? Nowhere else but on SyFy (SIIIIFEEEEE!!)

On the channel's website, they're currently allowing viewers to name the next original movie from SyFy. The movie is about Medieval knights who must fight an evil spirit that had been living in a relic. I figured I'd help them out in the creativity arena (since their well has run dry) and I contributed to the contest. Let's see what happens in March when SyFy choose the title for the movie. The winner gets a camera, a computer, and an amateur's movie-making kit!

Thanks for reading!

-Chris

Is Masters of Horror Really That Masterful?

I've been familiar with the "Masters of Horror" series for at least a couple years now, but I have yet to watch one of the films. Based on reviews from Flixster and amazon.com I don't think it would be worth my time.

The films in the "Masters of Horror" series are basically low-budget or indie horror movies done by different directors. Directors from different countries, ethnicity, whatever, they all contributed to the series. These aren't some no-name directors either, Tobe Hooper, Dario Argento and John Carpenter have all pitched in to create (apparently) something that is worth the time and effort.

With films such as "Unearthed," "Jenifer," and "Pro-life" it seems the series is quite a mixed bag. "Unearthed" is your basic "Tremors" story about ancient creatures that come up from the ground to eat people, "Jenifer" seems semi original, but pretty strange if you ask me. Finally, "Pro-Life" sounds to me like a weak attempt to argue with abortion rights. Sure I'm just picking on the ones I've heard of, but what do you want from me?

"Masters of Horror" came into my mind because I was flipping through the Instant Watch movies on my Netflix and I caught a glimpse of them. Judging by the ratings other viewers gave it, I have to say that maybe Masters of Horror isn't that great. I'm not entirely sure though.

What do you guys think? Have you seen any of the Masters of Horror movies? If so, which ones are good ones?