1985; Rated R; 84 Minutes
Mark Patton: Jesse Walsh
Kim Myers: Lisa Poletti
Robert Rusler: Ron Grady
Clu Gulager: Mr. Walsh
Hope Lange: Mrs. Walsh
Marshall Bell: Coach Schneider
Produced by Robert
Shaye; Directed by Jack Sholder; Screenwritten
by David Chaskin
by DAVID KEYES
are two moments in "Freddy's Revenge" that are so frightening
that they can easily be compared to the shower scene from
"Psycho." The first is the shot that opens the movie, and
the second doesn't happen until the tale end of the picture.
In between is a film that pretty much is deadweight, especially
compared to its predecessor, "A Nightmare On Elm Street."
Like so many sequels of the horror genre, "Part 2" of the
franchise mixes elements that worked for the first into
a script as dead as Krueger himself. No, this isn't a bad
movie, but if there had been more scenes as realistic as
the two I have already mentioned, I would have enjoyed the
first scene, like I said, is one of the best. It involves
a kid named Jesse Walsh, played by Mark Patton, who is on
the way home from school on a bus. He, along with two other
girls and the bus driver, are the only ones on board. The
driver swerves off the road and into a patch of desert,
where the sky turns dark, the windows and doors are sealed,
and the ground below them begins to drop, forming a huge
pit all around it.
driver turns to the three teenagers, who are in the back
of the bus screaming their heads off, and instead of a normal
human, we see a man, cloaked in darkness, with finger-knives
slashing up the seats as they scrape along them. As he gets
closer to the teenagers, the boy screams out, and wakes
scene is done with very little dialogue, lots of screaming,
and that twisted, Krueger laughter. It brought on a shock
of nostalgia as I sat there watching it unfold.
later scenes, we learn that this Walsh kid, going to high
school, has moved into the house which once belonged to
a family called the Thompsons.
closely: this is undoubtedly the family which occupied the
house in part one of the series. We get verification of
that when young Jesse discovers a diary in his closet which
belonged to Nancy Thompson, the daughter of the household.
it gets complicated. We thought Freddy got the 'axe' in
the last film, but apparently, his soul lives within the
walls of the old Thompson house. Young Jesse discovers,
along the way, that Krueger is using his body to carry on
his murders, though initially, he doesn't realize it until
after a few people have already been murdered. The strange
thing is, however, that the people who are killed happen
to be closely involved in Jesse's life.
example, Jesse is on the football team, and one night, his
coach gets killed in the locker room, after treating Jesse
like crap for weeks. Jesse is later spotted walking along
the freeway, unaware of what Krueger's entity has already
film sets up this plot in a logical way, with more scenes
of blood then dialogue, representing a good mental picture
of what usually goes on in these types of films. However,
the scenes appear more gruesome than they should, and most
of them aren't very frightening.
only other scene where we feel we get our money's worth
is one of the last, where Jesse's girlfriend tracks down
Krueger's entity and Jesse's body in that old boiler room
Freddy is so famous for. By this point, Jesse is covered
in blood, and Krueger's spirit is driven from sanity. His
girlfriend, feeling like she can get through to Jesse by
going through Krueger, kisses him, trying to make Jesse
realize that he should be in control, I guess.
not really sure what happened in this scene, but after that
kiss, Krueger was gone. It seemed kind of frightening, because
kissing a body with Krueger in it sounds a little creepy.
And it is--very creepy. The moment it happens, a chill goes
down our spine.
these two scenes are more frightening and realistic than
most of the scenes in the first film, you still can't help
but feel that this film isn't as good as it's predecessor.
The script is very shallow, with blood and gore to satisfy
the audience, and very little dialogue, which, if there
had been more, would have helped the script develop appropriately.
is no bad film, but it's no masterpiece either. Craven's
original hit was superb, shocking, and totally convincing.
You look at "Freddy's Revenge," and you see the same thing,
but without a logical pattern to pace itself with, and not
enough dialogue to set it up appropriately.
1998, David Keyes, Cinemaphile.org.
Please e-mail the author here
if the above review contains any spelling or grammar mistakes.