But I don't just mean okay, like some ideas where they can only go so far. I mean it will be brilliant. But odds are they'll mess it up. Wonder if Englund will return. He still fits the part.

I can't imagine the movie being even halfway decent if Englund doesn't play him. It's hard for me to think anyone else could do the role justice at this point.

I don't think Englund will return.They'll probably want some pretty boy actor to play Freddy.:rolleyes: < Bullshit.I think it will probably suck.Next they'll probably go after....hm....I don't know.:(

hm, yes, let's delve deep into the psychological backstory of why and more importantly HOW, a madman forced his soul into a doll.....yeah man, I'm peeing my pants for that remake:cool:

How much more psychology can you squeeze out of this bastard son of a 100 maniacs?

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/h...n_freddy9a.jpg

I'd like to see it delve deeper into the psychology of the victims. Give them dreams that actually relate to their characters, dreams they would have. Instead of just walking around outside.

Ummmm the back history of Freddy is he was a child molester and murderer. Does anyone really want to see them delve into that ? Basically it would be a kiddie snuff film if they "did it right". If they felt the classic version needed a change, why not just cut out that stupid ending scene and leave it as is ? :rolleyes:
CK

I don't remember once hearing in any of the movies that he molested the children.

You are correct. It stated that he was a child "murderer", not "molester". There is a bit of a difference.

I think they may have said molester in Freddy Vs. Jason...But that doesn't really count.

ugh ! Please don't make me go through them all now for references (knee deep in editing at the moment for a filmfest deadline). I remember for sure at some point it was stated "Freddy loves children, especially little girls" and it was definitely not a warm meaning. More like a creepy Michael Jackson thing. Part of the problem with franchises like 'Elm Street' and 'Halloween' is they continually decide to go in different directions at some point and viewers are "not supposed to count" this movie or that in the sequels because it doesn't fit the current movie being released (ala the return of Jamie Lee Curtis after she was "dead" for a few installments). Just another typical way to insult your intelligence by the studios in search of more money :rolleyes:
CK