The way I always read it was that the parents of the town SAID he was, but there was no proof of it- and I always thought that was Freddy's motivation for his revenge- that he was unfairly labeled.

In the original movie he murdered children, but there's no evidence he was a child molester- just rumors.

Here's a quote from wiki on the subject of Freddy in the remake:

And one more edit that vindicates Ferox, in re: the original SCRIPT, but not the filmed version:

I know Wiki isn't 100% accurate but from the Freddy Kruger page:

Additionally, Craven's original script detailed Krueger as a child molester, which Craven said was the "worst thing" he could think of (this idea was later recycled for the character's background in the 2010 remake). The decision was made to instead make Krueger a child murderer in order to avoid being accused of exploiting the spate of highly publicized child molestation cases in California around the time A Nightmare on Elm Street went into production.[23]

But here a bit from an interview with Englund which backs it up:

From: Screams & Nightmares, The Films of Wes Craven

Robert Englund recalls: 'Wes wrote the most evil, corrupt thing he could think of. Originally, that meant Freddy was a child molester. Right while we were shooting the fist Nightmare, there was a huge scandal based around an area of single parent yuppies in California known as South Bay. Child molesters had descended on this unsupervised flotsam of seventies leftover Me-generation American children. On the spot we changed the script from child molester to child murderer, mainly so Wes wouldn't be accused of exploiting the South bay case.'

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL - your edit came up just as I posted :-)

I always assumed he was a child molester.

At least the remake made the character dark again rather than the comical figure Freddy became. I hope we see some sequels.

I don't know. I've never read the original script. But If it had been like that in the original movie, i wouldn't have liked it either so whether or not it was in the original script or not, it still ruins the character.

Friends, I must clarify. I meant to type, "Return of the Living Dead 3." I realize this is akin to saying "Exorcist" when meaning to say "Exorcist 2."

I don't really see how it ruined the character at all. A child killer is just as vile as a child molester.

Return of the Living Dead 3 is great. The ones that followed weren't very good though.

Melancholia. (worst movie ever)
The Human Centipede 2 (not that I thought 1 was a masterpiece)
1408 (yes, for all its many fans I still think it's terrible)
The Ring 2 (American)
Dark Corners

Interesting thread proposition: what are some movies you hate that everyone else loves! :cool:

i agree with you on that, it would not make my 100 movies but if on tv i would sit through it and have a lough :D