Customer Reviews

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2 - Freddy's Revenge [VHS]

5 star:		(51)
4 star:		(44)
3 star:		(41)
2 star:		(47)
1 star:		(29)

 

 

Where's all this hatred coming from, why all the bashing? I personally think this is the of the bunch. I love the dream sequences, there very dark and disturbing. Freddie is still scary in this movie, the last time he would be in the series. I loved the whole storyline of this movie, Jesse finds the old diary of Nancy, the heroine from part 1, and dreams of a scarred, razor clawed monster that tries to take his body, and wants him to do all the dirty work. Sure the biker bar and s&m references were kind of odd, but they were effective. And of course, this one boosts the legendary "pool scene"

Surprisingly enough, I liked this sequel to a much much better movie. You can't really take horror sequels too seriously, and this movie is proof of that. It definetly takes you on a different twist compared to Nancy's story in the original. Basically, a teenager and his family move into Nancy's house 5 years after the "incident" and weird things start to happen (Birds spontaneously combust) and of course the star of the movie starts having Freddy dreams. But in contrast to the original, Freddy starts to take over this boy's body, and well, I don't want to spoil it for you. It is a pretty well mapped out movie. There is tons of gore, even the kind that makes you cringe a little bit. Freddy kind of stays in the shadows and eventually pulls into real-life, which is the problem, he just starts to pop up in real-life without any explanation, kind of inane. Oh well. Still a good movie, I suggest you go to your local video store and rent it if you haven't seen it.

A Nightmare on Elm Street is one of the best movies from the 80's so Nightmare 2:Freddy's Revenge tends to be bashed for being too slow or for being too much of a departure from the original.I personnaly believe this movie is in-between.Certainly nowhere near the original but there are many worse movies.So,anyway,the best horror icon from the 80's,Freddy,is back and he wants to possess a boy's body to keep going with the killing.Here's a huge change compared to the original.I admit it's weird to see a Nightmare where nightmares aren't the main attraction but there are still a few to see.In this sequel,Freddy is just like he is in the original.So he does not have a whole lot of dialogue and he's still very much in the dark.If you expect a movie as scary as the original,though.....The cast is decent but I find myself preferring the original's cast.Of course,one of the movie's weirdest parts,it's all the homoerotic content.It's kinda intriguing because you get to wonder what Jesse's sexual preferences are but it's never taken very far.The first half of the movie is mostly watchable but it does not pick up until the second half which is disappointing.The original was great from beginning to end.This one has so many slow spots that you might lose interest before the fun begins.The climax of the movie isn't quite as bad as people claim.I like it but the original was more satisfying overall.Well,this movie deserves 3 stars in my opinion.Good movie but it pales compared to its prequel and that's what I hate.

For me, this one ranks behind Nightmare 1 as the absolute best in the series. This one has some classical Krueger-cliches. And some great and memorable FX.

The story pretty much starts off with a bus ride in the Nightmare Desert as I like to call it, which is a great setting for the series. In that opening scene we meet Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton). We get a glimpse of Freddy and it all wraps up into a hellishly perfect horror opening..very scary. Jesse takes us threw the rest of the flick, as we meet his parents, his father is the great Clu Gulager from Return of the Living Dead, and we also meet his little daughter who plays a quite pivotal role in the film, due to the hilarious bird scene and the infamous jump-rope song she performs. Jesse is invited to a party by his girlfriend Lisa, who's scurrying for information on Freddy's history. Jesse and Lisa have a steamy sequence which ends with a memorable Freddy-tongue sequence, those are always classic! And he runs off to Grady's house, a friend who couldn't attend the party because he was grounded for pushing his grandmother down the stairs. Grady's portrayed by one of my favorite horror stars, Robert Rusler, who also plays A.J. in the 1986 vampire-feast Vamp, and co-stars with Robert Downey Jr. as a couple of bullies in Weird Science. Jesse hangs at Grady's for a bit. Then suddenly, one of the best moments in Nightmare On Elm Street history happens when Freddy bursts threw Jesse's body to kill Robert Rusler, in perhaps the best death of the film. The special effects here are earth-shattering!

Freddy ends up terrorizing party-goers in the infamous and controversial pool scene, which has recieved positive and negative comments, I personally think its a slasher tour de force! The finale finds Lisa at Freddy's old work place, where she confronts him and gets Jesse back. And they all live happily ever after...right? Well, too bad, this is a horror movie, and it ends with Freddy bursting threw a chest in a ending that's equal to that of Nightmare 1.

I find Nightmare 2 to be a grand horror film, that I almost rank with the original Wes Craven classic. After all, these are all classics nowadays.

i really don't understand peoples obsession with the gay undertones. I really couldn't find any. If there were even any it was the bar scene. And although there was not alot of freddy, the mood was still dark and i liked that. Not many killings, but i liked the suspense...Everyone seems so prejudice on this movie!!Some liked it- but it doesn't have to be so overly nitpicked, does it??

I know that the original NOES was possibly the best to most people here. But the only reason for that, I believe, is because it's scarier and the blood and gore is A LOT! NOES2 sometimes lacks some of these things but who cares? It's still got the good ol' nightmarish atmosphere that all the others (including the first) have! Mark Patton did an excellent job with the role as Jessie, a new kid who moves to Elm Street with his family and stays at the exact same house that Nancy and her family used to live in during the gruesome bizzare incidents. Once again, Freddy is back! This time, he's using Jessie as a link in order to cross through his dreams and into the REAL world! From there, all hell breaks loose!! (especially at the pool party scene. That was the craziest!)The rest of the film may sometimes seem TOO mediocre, but it all comes together and picks up near the end! Robert Englund's second act as the disfigured psycho killer is 10x better than the first, and all the other actors did a good job too! :) My fav characters were both Jessie and Lisa, they really moved the film along nicely and should have recieved an award for their performances! So why not give it a second chance? It's really not as bad as SOME people say. SWEET DREAMS!

After seeing A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge you as the audience will have to ask yourself "Are scriptwriters supposed to see the movie they're writing a sequel for, or just guess what the story is?" That's exactly what Nightmare 2 comes across as, because no one seems to have a clue as to what type of movie they're supposed to be making.

So the story is that Freddy Krueger wants to possess some boy whose moved into the house formerly inhabited by Nancy from the first film in order to start killing people again...why? Doesn't Freddy Krueger kill teenagers in their dreams? Apparently he got his dream haunting license revoked by Satan between this sequel and the original due to his embarrassment at the hand of one teenage girl with a booby trap book, because he doesn't kill anyone in their dreams throughout this entire film. Nope, instead he has to try and possess some dude in order to...get in the real world? Really? I though Freddy was WEAKEST when in the real world. Doesn't everything in Craven's original film kind of show him as a pushover when he was brought into Nancy's real house? So why Freddy wants to get in the real world where he's vulnerable to REAL pain is beyond me.

Then we have our actors. A fresh, new teenage cast who befalls one of the world's most feared forces: a crippling lack of talent! No one in this movie could act, and spend most of the time seeming to struggle to remember lines or motions which leads to some of the most unintentionally funny bits I've ever seen in a film not featured on Mystery Science Theater 3000...in fact thinking back at it, in this film you'll see more laughable, unintentional homoerotica than all of Joel Schmaucher's Batman & Robin!

Then there's the script writing such as a bird randomly exploding after apparently getting bird rabies from Freddy. The father's response to a - an obviously paper - bird exploding is accusing his son of shoving a cherry bomb into it...HOW? This is simply the one quote I remember, but trust me, the entire script is full of these moments. Only person who gets out of here with any dignity is Robert Englund, who luckily just has a few lines, most of which are short monologues or one-liners (which I sure hope were intentionally written to evoke laughs from Englund's deep Freddy voice cursing).

Unless you're a fan of MST3K style riffing of bad movies (which, luckily, I am and thus made it through this movie A-OK) than you will want to avoid this movie at all costs. This movie, for those joking crowds, definitely falls under the "So-Bad-It's-Good" genre, but that doesn't change the fact that if you aren't into that you will hate, hate, HATE this movie with a passion.

If you're a fan of Wes Craven's character then you will want to avoid most of the Nightmare sequels (#3 is worth giving a try though), but if you're not a fan of unintentionally funny movies and would prefer to see Freddy as Wes Craven conceived him I suggest sticking to the original film and Wes Craven's New Nightmare.

Nobody, I repeat - NOBODY has ever played a horror villain as good as Robert Englund. He is the king. As Freddy Krueger, he scared the crap out of millions of people and became a horror icon in the process.

First of all, I don't understand why so many people dislike this movie. It's every bit as dark and frightening as the first, maybe even more so. Yes, you heard me correctly - this is probably MORE frightening than the original. Now, I love the original as much as anyone else, it's a masterpiece in the world of horror films, no doubt. But this sequel is even better, to me.
Another thing is that the plot is completely different from the first one. I've heard many people complain about this, but I don't see what the problem is. I mean, it would've been easy to just copy the same storyline as the original, but here, they create something new and intriguing.
This time, Freddy possesses the body of Jessie, a teenage boy who has just moved into the Elm Street house with his family. His family and his girlfriend are extremely worried about him and puzzled by his wayward behavior. Soon, Jessie discovers that it's Fred Krueger who's trying to possess him and make him murder against his will. Eventually, his girlfriend Lisa is the only one who can end the madness. You'll have to watch it to see what I mean.

There are many frightening scenes in the movie, but there's one in particular that stands out among the rest. I'm referring to the scene in which Jessie stays at his friend Grady's house. Jessie falls asleep soon and it appears that everything is fine. Then, Freddy starts to take possession of Jessie once again, and you can literally see him come out of Jessie's body. Within seconds, Jessie has turned into Freddy, and you have to see the evil smile that comes across Freddy's face. Pay attention to this shot - IT'S ABSOLUTELY TERRIFYING. Just the way that he smiles, it's so unbelievably evil that I swear it will send chills down your spine. It scared the living crap out of me as a kid and it still gives me the creeps today. I can't explain it - you just have to see it.

And there are many more scenes that are scary as hell (like the pool party scene, that was a trip). Elsewhere, you get terror on a school bus, dogs with human heads, and plenty of gruesome deaths.
So don't listen to the people who say that this movie sucks. It's every bit as good as the original. If you enjoy having the s**t scared out of you, then get this movie. You won't regret it.

THIS IS THE 2ND SCARIEST NIGHTMARE MOVIE, BEFORE FREDDY FOUND HIS HUMOR. ANYWAY 4 STARS.

Nightmare 2 is often regarded as one of the weaker entries in the series, and it's easy to see why. It's the most different of the Nightmare films, with more emotional baggage than fans prefer, but the effort should be applauded.

For one, the film is very stylish, the atmospherics owing a lot to Dario Argento's work and a host of other modern horror films. The colors are rich and expressionistitc, most notably Freddy's boilerroom in the climax. Composer Christopher Young's score is a serious contribution and helps to lift the film beyond the usual stalk-and-slash cliches. His later Hellraiser scores would raise the stock of those films immensely.

Freddy's Revenge is not too original a title, but it's accurate as we pick up five years after the original Nightmare. Somenody has finally moved into the original Nightmare house, and soon teenager Jesse is having Freddy Krueger nightmares and waking up with night terrors. He finds Nancy's diary from the original (left behind by a dim real estate agent) and he slowly learns the Freddy story. This time Freddy needs a human body to do his killing out in the real world (though it's never explained why).

Horror movie sequels (particularly from the 1980s-onward) usually take elements of well-known films and weave a story around the main attraction (Freddy, Jason, Michael Meyers, Pinhead) since their duty is to satisfy the fans. But like many films of its ilk Nightmare 2 is saved by atmospherics. There's also a little bit more going on here than in most Nightmare films in terms of thematic content, including a creepy homoerotic element to the proceedings that is not appealing per se, but does indicate that the writers were already trying to do something different with the character. The lead actor is bit too intense, like he's on some serious Method technique, but who can fault anyone for trying in these movies? As for Freddy, he's creepy for sure, and he continues his cheap 'boo' scares--jumping out of dark corners, appearing in front of people running away from him, etc. Also, Freddy's ability to exit dreamland and enter reality seems to hinge mostly on plot convenience so that there's usually little point in thinking about it too much.

By the end Nightmare 2 resembles an updated old-fashioned horror film where love conquers all, hence the disdain series fans look at this movie with. It's understandable, but I found Nightmare 2 a welcome change that would not have been possible later in the series when Freddy became a wise-cracking parody of himself. Credit to the makeup and effects crew here as well; Freddy looks downright nasty, and his brain-exposure bit ('You've got the body', etc.) is very well done. Also, the film makes liberal use of the 'It's only a dream' device so that we don't know when Jesse is dreaming and when he's going nuts. They're making some kind of statement here on homo-eroticism, including the S&M gym teacher (!) that most viewers would rather not think about, and for good reason. Oddly enough though, it also gives Freddy some kind of social angle. In the end, there isn't a lot of followthrough, however, the filmmakers need to satisfy genre addicts while at the same time trying to keep things fresh (for more sequels).