When one discusses great horror films, the original A Nightmare on Elm Street is bound to come up. A Nightmare on Elm Street was the quintessential slasher flick, one with a truly threatening, yet brutally appealing, villain, Freddy Krueger. Freddy was the kind of slasher villain that audiences loved, no matter how much he scared them. Paired with the intrigue and terror that comes with a character that operates primarily through one's dreams, Freddy had a macabre charm and wit that supplemented the film's subversive and gleefully frightful nature. A Nightmare on Elm Street reveled in its premise and made for a fun as well as a frightful time. Its remake, however, does no such thing.

Production company Platinum Dunes' remake of the horror classic tries to strike a balance between both acknowledging the original film while also trying to make as individual a take on the material as it can. Instead of continuing to inject its material with brutal fun, it chooses a darker, more serious tone, and introduces heavier story elements that the original film left to the imagination. It does this while still trying to make use of the horror characterization techniques that were built upon by Wes Craven in the original film. Unfortunately, all of these efforts to both honor the source material and bring an original voice to it come to naught when these elements don't end up meshing well and come off as simply trying to stuff as much iconic imagery into the film as possible.

Throughout A Nightmare on Elm Street, we are presented with recreations of iconic imagery from the first film. The way that director Samuel Bayer presents it, though, doesn't come off as frightening or essential to the film's story. Instead, it feels like he's going down a checklist, making sure he's nodding to all the right moments from the original that he can during the film's runtime. They come and go without any impact on the film, and hurt the film's attempts to be in any way creative.

Bayer also manages to make the film play out without any tension whatsoever. In a horror film, the tension stems from knowing something will jump out, but not knowing when or from where. Once the threat jumps out, it creates a release that is frightening enough to keep the audience on the edge of their seat and terrified for the rest of the scene. This never happens in A Nightmare on Elm Street. When each character is put in a dangerous setting, we know that Freddy is going to jump out, but the tension of not knowing when or from where is gone. There are a few explanations for this.

First of all, the characters make no connection with the audience. In the original film, each character made an individual mark on the story, and each loss was felt. In this remake, the characters are all one-note, and make no such impact on either the story or the audience. Without any importance to the story, the characters will have no importance to the audience. The cast doesn't help much in this area either. They bring nothing to their respective characters, and play them all with the monotony with which they were written. Ergo, when we see these flat characters placed in situations where they are threatened by Freddy, we don't care if they live or die, and the tension of not knowing is removed from the scene.

The second reason for the absence of tension can be attributed to the story-telling choices Bayer makes. In the film, we are given huge character development points for certain characters that should deeply impact the way they act within the story, but instead, they act exactly the same way they acted before, as though the story developments meant to give them depth and change have no satisfying effect. This kills the tension a bit, when we are supposed to look at the characters empathetically, but are unable to. If they're not acting in a way that is believable within the realm of the story, then we are once again emotionally stranded, and will not feel any tension at their demises.

The third and final reason for the absence of tension is the film's tone. Instead of going for a sardonically frightening feel as the original film aimed, this new version chooses to be a more serious affair. Unfortunately, the seriousness hovers over the film in a very big way, and makes it boring. What made the original filmsso terrifying was that while death was taking place all around, Freddy was having fun doing it, and we, quite sadistically in a way, had fun with Freddy. Freddy doesn't seem to be doing that here. He seems to be just killing teenagers, and doing it without any joy or flair. When the film tries to be creepy, it fails simply because it introduces its "creepy" elements quite arbitrarily, and is also using elements that have been used before, albeit far more creatively. The absence of tension in this film kills whatever chance it had at being in any way entertaining and fun.

In terms of story issues, the film is clearly plagued. As mentioned before, things left to the imagination in the original films are made specific in this film, and actually hurt the film as a result. These specific characterizations do nothing to make us feel anything more specific for any of the characters, but actually make the film more of an uncomfortable experience. While horror films are not meant to be comfortable, the implications brought on by these developments create implications later in the film that bring on feelings of disgust rather than those of terror.

The film's final issue is with its villain, the iconic Freddy Krueger. In the role, Jackie Earle Haley is a much more serious brand of creepy than his predecessor, Robert Englund. While that would be fine, Haley seems as though he's channeling his performance as Rorschach from Watchmen, and isn't really putting anything new or creative into the role. As a character, though, Freddy is no longer joyful in his sadism, which takes most of the fun out of watching his character. We are also given more information about Freddy both through the writing and Haley's performance, which takes away the mysterious aspect of the character that made him so much creepier. Freddy is not left to the imagination in this film, and it kills his character as a result.

A Nightmare on Elm Street is a remake that doesn't do any justice to its forebears. It takes the fun and the terror out of its premise, and ends up being a very boring, very colorless experience. Once the standard in horror villains, Freddy Krueger is now bereft of mystery, and is no scarier as a result. A Nightmare on Elm Street is an example of a remake done for the sake of brand recognition; It's lifeless, cold, and ultimately, totally uncalled for.