Michael Bay's Platinum Dunes Rebooting Nightmare on Elm Street

January 30, 2008
Source: Variety

A Nightmare on Elm Street

Are horror reboots really worth it these days? Rob Zombie's Halloween did fairly well last September, but not amazing. Now Platinum Dunes, which is headed by Michael Bay, Brad Fuller, and Andrew Form, has decided to restart the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, by restarting another new franchise from scratch. The original 1984 Wes Craven film starring Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger has spawned eight various sequels since then, including Freddy vs Jason, and has become of the most well known horror characters. But seriously, will this even turn out even remotely good?

Platinum Dunes has said that it won't hire a writer for the new film until the writers strike is over. Dunes previously rebooted The Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, with two remakes in the last few years, and is working on also rebooting the Friday the 13th franchise, with that film due out in 2009. Throw Halloween and Child's Play into the mix, and we've got an endless supply of horror movie remakes arriving in the next few years. It seems that the horror genre is still thriving, but everyone is out of fresh ideas, so they're turning to remakes and reboots instead.

The Nightmare on Elm Street franchise focuses on the psycho Freddy Krueger, a killer who haunts the subconscious dreams of teenagers and kills them in their sleep. Freddy is one of the iconic horror movie killers that most people recognize, along with Jason Voorhees from Friday the 13th and Michael Myers from Halloween.

What's your take on this whole horror reboot situation? The only reason Halloween was as good as it was, is because Rob Zombie added his unique touch to it. I won't say that Zombie is a master of horror, but his filmmaking style, especially when it comes to Halloween, is very unique. I"m worried that both the reboots of Friday the 13th and now A Nightmare on Elm Street will be butchered (no pun intended) into an ugly mess by some over-the-top director. Let's hope I'm wrong, because I really want to see these horror characters come back in style!

Find more posts: Movie News



Nooooo!!!!! The first was so good, why can't they leave one of the great horror icons alone! Personally, for me, I didn't like any part of Rob Zombie's version of Halloween; I did like the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre with Jessica Biel. In addtion to Nightmare on Elm Street, Platinum Studios is doing a new Friday the 13th. What are the greenlight original horror movies? Okay, I get that these have an established fanbase and that they've made a lot of money for their respective studios in the past, but we need new franchises/characters, not retreads. I will go and see them, if they are good. Afterall I can always see the original on DVD or Blu-Ray, when it's released there.

Daniel M. on Jan 30, 2008


Well, at least "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" was a vast improvement over the original. "Nightmare" should be left alone-unless a really good script is written and Robert Englund returns, we'll see. "Amityville Horror" was pretty good too. Never really cared much for "Friday" movies, but of course, regardless of script and actors, teenagers will all flock to see it on opening weekend then the movie will quickly make it's way to DVD. By the way, the update of "Prom Night" appears to be an instant bomb--based on the trailer.

Spider on Jan 30, 2008


But... But... why? If there really is a God... please smite them all... now!

CSpuppydog on Jan 30, 2008


Stupid idea to rehash movies that went on too long to begin with. Freddy was good all the way up to the end. But you can't redo them all over again, people spent 20 years watching them over the years. Nightmare on Elm is over! let it rest on the shelves of video stores and people vast film collections. As per post number 2, The remake of the "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" was NOT A VAST IMPROVEMENT WHATSOEVER. It was quite atrocious to be honest. I mean, Michael Bay? really? not a chance. The original 1974 was and still is one of the scariest and brilliantly made horror films I've ever seen. Or I'll even walk the plank and say "ever made". - Tobe Hooper forever! heck, the man made "Poltergeist" - which is another horror classic I hope is not remade by Hollywood. They got it right the first time. Like the old saying goes. "If its not broken, don't fix it."

Conrad on Jan 30, 2008


This is such a waste of time. First of all, did people forget hjow to create original ideas in Hollywood or what? I don't get it. As a fledgling horror writer, this whole concept pisses me off beyond belief. This jack asses are getting paid to REDO a movie that has already BEEN DONE..and chances are it'll only be worse. (Besides, let's face it...Nightmare on Elm Street got incredibly stupid after part 3). Secondly...Michael Bay in charge of a classic horror movie remake? It's the equivalent of having Paris Hilton give a lecture on astrophysics.

Birdwatching From Mars on Jan 30, 2008


No, Rob Zombie's HALLOWEEN did fairly well in it's first weekend, thanks to the cache of John Carpenter's original masterpiece HALLOWEEN. RZ's version dropped like a freaking stone in the following weeks and didn't even make it to the actual Halloween week! We've seen this cache work in the past from Brett Ratner's XMEN: The Bowel Movement to Marcus Nispel's TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. In fact, all sequels and remakes are built upon the hoped for goodwill cache of the previous or original film. Which is why TCM: The Beginning, went straight to DVD and died. No cache from the original's sequels - which sucked - and no good will from Nispel's remake. Michael Bay's name alone won't carry a Horror Thriller movie because most Horror Thriller fans have his number and can't stand him. I like his action movies though. When it comes to action movies, Bay is in his zone. When it comes to Horror, he and Nispel are somewhere between Ulli Lommel and Uwe Bolls. Finally, everyone is not out of fresh ideas, just the Hollywood studios, which is why they are felching off of the past. It won't work in this case though. Not when you have Michael Bay at the helm.

Feo Amante on Jan 30, 2008


Personally, I liked the depth Zombie brought to the Michale Myers character. I was never really a fan of the original Halloween series, so his film sparked a new interest for me. A Nightmare on Elm Street is to this day one of my all-time favorite horror flicks. When the injested all the humor starting with part II, they ruined it for me. I liked Wes Craven's New Nightmare only because it has a different approach. Robert Englund is an icon, but I can't see it making sense to bring him back. If you're rebooting a franchise, you need a new actor in the role. I'd love to see this done properly, and with Craven, and Englund's blessings. Friday the 13th - The last I heard was that the new film was not going to be a remake, but a sequel. ANyone know anything about this? The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) is a scary flick. It's a classic, and always will be. The remake stands on it's own though, and is every bit as horrific as the original. If I have to pick between the two, I'll take Jessica Biel.

TCox on Jan 30, 2008


I actually enjoyed the Texas Chainsaw remake by Bay, however that was the only good one. ANYONE REMEMBER 'THE HITCHER'?! Or 'The Amityville Horror'. All that I want to see is another 'Chucky'!

Ryan on Jan 30, 2008


Finally, some horror movies we all know and love. The past years have been nothing but zombie, vampire, and Japanese remakes. Blechh!

TheREALHECKLE on Jan 30, 2008


Interesting subject! (As per post #5, Connie)---(take a look at post #7)--T Cox knows where I'm coming from! AS A VAST IMPROVEMENT--I MEANT---Jessica Biel; better production; better acting; props to director Marcus Nispel--still scary as hell, like the original. however I still prefer the new version, eventhough it stands apart from the 1974 original. (Look at this Connie) TCM was produced for 9.5 million and went on to generate $80.5 million here in the US --totaling $107 million worldwide.. As a producer, like Michael Bay, do you think he'd stop doing remakes if the returns can be this whopping?? So forget it--remakes are here to stay!! (As per post #6 Feo Amante (horrible)) You obviously don't know anything beyond the realm of the new "Halloween" remake. Good film, by the way! Let's talk X-Men 3! Props to Brett Ratner who delivered an X-Men movie that millions liked. Grossing $459.2 million worldwide, this movie delivered, despite bad buzz about Ratner directing and became the most successful in the series. TCM: The Beginning did have a theatrical release where it grossed $39.5 million in the US on a $16 million budget clearly you had NO CLUE! Straight to DVD???(LOL) That is why we are getting more remakes and reboots that we know what to do with!! So gripe all you want guys!!There's nothing else you can do!!!

Spider on Jan 30, 2008


Un-fuckin-believable. But seriously, we don't need Robert to play Freddie. They are going to go back to the beginning so they need someone younger.I am a huge fan of the original and I couldn't sleep when I first saw it. It scared the shit out of me. If the remake can do that, then , and only then will I see it.

wm on Jan 30, 2008


Remake. Franchise. Cash Cow. Protest. Avoid. New Ideas aren't dead - look at Cloverfield.

Dr.Duvel on Jan 31, 2008


"What's your take on this whole horror reboot situation?" it's gay. "The only reason Halloween was as good as it was, is because Rob Zombie added his unique touch to it." the only way i'll agree with that statement is if by "unique touch" you mean the vulva shots. those were good. in fact, they were the ONLY good things in the 2nd half of the movie, which otherwise sucked ass. the dialogue and acting were embarrassingly bad (though i guess that's par for the course with the horror genre), and the money shots were all dull and derivative. if he had ended the thing halfway through and marketed as a prequel, it would have been a much better movie (although we would have missed out on the best of the vulva shots, unless he had gone ahead and made his wife get all the way naked during her stripper scene, which he should have done anyway just to be cool). but yeah, the whole classic horror rehashing craze totally eats butt-crack. leave those movies alone and come up with some new ideas on your own, you pathetic excuses for horror filmmakers. the saw movies are evidence that it IS still possible to come up with good ideas. i know this is a totally random comparison, but the remake/reboot thing reminds me of about 10-15 yrs ago, when some country music dipshit did a cover of an old eagles song from the 70s and had a hit with it. there was suddenly this mad rush among all those top 40 nashville dorks to rush out and stake a claim on THEIR eagle song, so they could parasitize them too, just like the other dude had done (i don't remember who it was because i hate country). but anyway, this reminds me of that. it's a race to see who can wolf down and then quickly regurgitate the best old ideas first, before anyone else claims them. and maybe i should have said "defecate" instead of "regurgitate." the rehashed horror movies i've seen thus far have actually been more shitty than pukey...

Devil on Jan 31, 2008


Good cherry picking Spider. I notice you ran a donut, mentioning the budget of TCM and the budget of TCM: The Beginning, but ignoring the budget of X3. That gross of $459 million is more than eclipsed by the fact that the theater gets half that, so the studio, after a budget of about $210,000,000, and another $25 to $35 million to make all of those thousands of prints to actually be shown in the theaters, got a gross return of about 229,600,000 - less than $20 million over just the cost to make the movie (I'm not even mentioning advertising). Then the cost of making the DVD and sending that out? Have you seen the DVD sales on XMEN 3? Only a year+ out on DVD, it has an sales rank of 2,798. To put that in perspective, compare it to Equilibrium, which - not being a sequel (and nowhere near the budget of X3) - had no prior cache of previous hit movies, and virtually no theater time (301 screens in the U.S.) or advertising. sales rank of #903. Even the 1986 Stuart Gordon cheapie, From Beyond is doing better on DVD than XMEN: The Last Stand! - and it had nowhere near the budget! So millions actually didn't like XMen3: Millions went to *see* it thanks to the cache of the first two - which is the only reason that sequels and remakes are made in the first place - as a quick-buck way to cash in on the superior original. Nobody ever says, "Hey! Let's do a remake of Supernova!" Brent killed the XMEN franchise and sales of the first two XMEN on DVD, dropped appreciably, shortly after the XMEN3 release (the release of 2 actually strengthened the sale of XMEN on DVD). XMEN left the U.S. theaters nearly tripling its opening weekend take and more than doubling its budget. XMEN 2 left the U.S. theaters with more than 2.5 times the take of its opening weekend and nearly doubling its budget. XMEN3 left the U.S. theaters with less than double its opening weekend (it made more in its opening weekend than all the following weeks combined) and grossed .16 of its budget. Brent told the story he wanted to tell (according to him) and got the budget he wanted to spend. So yeah, after the opening weekend "goodwill" cache of the previous films, X3 dropped like a stone. I was wrong on the TCM: Beginning "straight to DVD" statement. But on the other hand, even you admit that the sequel came no where close to the receipts of the first, bringing in less than half of the box office. The first TCM remake created no momentum for the second, since The Beginning brought in less than half the box office of the first. And with a DVD release of Jan, 2007, how is TCM: The Beginning doing in sales? It has an rank of 8,356 (Hell, even Supernova is selling way better than that! Even Attack of the Killer Tomatoes is doing better than that!). And both the TCM remake and the remake sequel aren't even close to the sales of the Tobe Hooper original, still going strong after 30+ years! (Most of this information culled from news reports from,, and Corrections to my ignorance come courtesy of and the people who slam me when I'm wrong, which is why its so freaking cool to come here in the first place!)

Feo Amante on Jan 31, 2008


Micheal Bay + Nighmare on Elm Street = Wavy-haired Freddy performing backflips on a motorcycle through vast explosions I’ll pass…

C-Young on Jan 31, 2008


Good attempt at rationalizing the topic Feo Amante and yet you stray off the mark! My respects to you as a fan of horror movies--and movies in general!! I'll try to be brief as I have information to share. First of all, there was no doughnut (although I could send you a dozen from Krispy Kreme) because this is a horror movie reboot/remake thread and not about comic books movies! I NEVER mentioned that TCM: The Beginning was a better film than 2003s TCM, hence the lower sales figure. Let's be logical! Horror reboots/remakes/spinoffs have potential to make bank. Michael Bay knows this too well. With that said, how do expect for TCM:The Beginning(although it made 39.5 million in US) to out sell its superior predecessor when TCM: The beginning was a PREQUEL not a sequel?? How do you build momentum for a movie that takes you back to the beginning?? Ask yourself these questions. (Note: Would not be wise to greenlight another installment; the 1st TCM made all the money for both flicks anyway!!) THE POINT: Reboots/remakes are here to stay..despite what we say and do!! (Look for the return of Freddy in "A Nightmare on Elm Street") Next, let's plunge into X-Men: The Last Stand(doughnut, notwithstanding) Let's turn attention to comic book franchises! Budget: $210 million (Jackman's, Berry's, KcKellen's, Stewart's fees have increased this) Box office:$234 million in US; Foreign:$224 = Worldwide- $459.2 million Rental Gross (US only): $ 48.17 (as of 12/31/06) ***source: According to took their news from The Hollywood Reporter): Article: X-Men: The Last Stand Tops with 5 million DVDs Sold (Dated 10/11/2006)---hardly the bomb you portrayed it to be!! ***This is only for the day of release (encapsulating all sales outlets) Not to mention the subsequent sales figures from Best Buy, Circuit City, etc---now, X-Men is being sold as a set!! Honestly, who buys their movies at Amazon?....I mean, really!! Millions did not like it??? Hmmm! Brett Ratner killed the franchise??? Hmmmm Brett Ratner gets his $140 million budget and behold: Rush Hour 3 What's happening now: "X-Men origins: Wolverine" about to begin production "Magneto" movie in works; stalled due to Writer's strike Now be honest and logical Feo Amante!! Do you think anything would be greenlit if X-3 had bombed? 2.) Do you think Brett Ratner would have gotten to do Rush Hour 3? Thank you so much for posing this interesting challenge and keeping me on my far as your ignorance (mentioned in your post) said it, I didn't. Bear in mind that this business is about money and common sense! That's why I love this forum! ( 'jeopardy' theme plays in background) Anyway! Booop! Thanks for playing!!

Spider on Jan 31, 2008


One correction to my post above: The figures for "X-Men: The Last Stand" DVD, according to, were for the 1st week of release, not the 1st day of release. (This is what happens when you have to edit post for length!!) Good day to all movie fans!!!!

Spider on Jan 31, 2008


My pick: Nic Cage for Freddy Kruger! Yes, I'm kidding. Who would be creepy enough to put on the glove and actually be scary? I guaran-damn-tee you he will be a British actor. Mark my words. When you have foreign actors, like Christian Bale, who can do an American accent better than most Americans....the obvious choice is to cast someone of that caliber. Not that I want Bale as Krueger. He's got Bruce Wayne & John Connor to deal with right now. Who would be a replacement for the aging Englund? Seriously. We have to discuss this thoroughly. I want to know everyone's casting ideas. Alex -you have to get in on this one. Who's your pick?

TCox on Jan 31, 2008


Hey TCox! How about the original Freddy, Robert Englund? Check this out! Hot off the presses!

Spider on Jan 31, 2008


All I'm going to say is it better be rated R or X and not be some fucking comedy.

wm on Jan 31, 2008


Thanks Spider! I'm actually shocked by that article. Not that Englund couldn't do it, but that Hollywood would allow him to be involved. It will be interesting to see how it all pans out.

TCox on Jan 31, 2008


(1) Halloween remake,.....good?? WTF?? Are you people out of your minds? The reason the original was great is because you didn't know why Michael Myers was the way he was. Why don't they start remaking bad horror movies instead of good ones. All they are doing is ruining the iconic originals, with "hack and slash" crapfests. All I know is that the next generation of kids won't see the originals, they'll see the new ones and say "Dude, That Sucked". And then they'll die never knowing the truth, that it was done better 30 years ago. Quick somebody stopped Zombie, before it's to late. (2) Why are you talking about X-Men 3, who freaking cares!! It is what it is, not a remake and part of a franchise. (3) What we should be afraid of......STAR TREK Thats it I'm out

Scorpio on Feb 1, 2008


1.) "Halloween" remake was good--excellent backstory! People of all ages will still watch the originals, thanks to word of mouth and cable! 2.) X-Men 3 was a closed discussion between A & B so C you out Scorpio! (You also care!--enough to bring it up!!) 3.) "Star Trek" will be great too for the new generation. The original 'Trek' and crew still rocks!! (Rolls eyes at utter ignorance)....Any other questions about re-makes, read the posts again--SCORPIO!!....and again!!!!...and again!

Spider on Feb 1, 2008


I just read that Englund is not part of the Elm Street reboot. I think I know who would be a great replacement: Jeremy Sisto. If you don't know who he is Google him. He's currently on one of the Law & Order shows. He's creepy, and a great actor. What do you think?

TCox on Feb 4, 2008


(post 11 - spider) Do you base all of your opinions on a movie's box office gross? Because if so, then I'm forced to remind you that the number one all-time highest grossing movie in the US was "Titanic". And "Shrek 2" was number 3. What I want to know is, how many scenes with cars going through windows does Michael Bay intend to put in this film? I'm gonna lowball it and call Four.

Eugene on Feb 4, 2008


Per post #26--Eugene: Clearly you didn't read the previous posts. Don't know what your point is when you mention the "Titanic" box office gross! The movies mentioned on the above posts required box office receipts to make a point.(READ ABOVE POSTS) Now, I'm forced to remind you that Hollywood is a numbers business. If the numbers are BIG, then we get sequels, prequels, and reboots. ...(Duh??)..If Michael Bay was directing--you'd have at least something to comment about----however, he's just A PRODUCER on this "Nightmare" reboot. Thanks Eugene! Please be sure to READ THE ACTUAL posts above when making references!

Spider on Feb 8, 2008


Robert IS Freddy - Please sign the petition to show your support of the real Freddy!!

Melinda on Mar 19, 2008


Leave Freddy Krueger alone

Victor on May 10, 2008



Tyler on May 27, 2008


Well, I for one, as a general newcomer to the horror movie genre (I mean, of course I saw the originals as a kid -- child of the 80's and all) thanks to my boyfriend who has a real avid interest, think this whole thing is an abomination and can't believe anyone could be FOR it!!! Not that any of our opinions really matter in the long run -- board meetings between money crunching accountants and producers decided these fates -- but it is interesting to here the comments. It is interesting to me that nobody has pushed the Dead collection (Dawn of the Dead, Day of the Dead) or said how they feel about them . . . Jeremy Sisto?? Are you freakin' kidding me??!! Wasn't he the guy in Wrong Turn (~shudder for crappiness sake~) who was shot with arrow? He's about as scary as fluffy bunny . . . You just can't DO Freddy without Robert Englund; it would be like Christmas without cookies or Fourth of July without fireworks -- he's the spark that made it interesting. There's a gleam in his eye that just isn't transferable to someone else in the glove. And that voice, that crazed laugh! Because you can hold your crucifix as close as you want, keep your coffee hot ALL night long, and pray to Jesus or Buddha or Tom Cruise, for that matter, it doesn't matter, Freddy's still going to mess you up and there isn't anything to save you. {Enter maniacal R. Englund laugh} You just can't do it! Think about it for a moment . . . Michael Myers was a BIG dude killing people with a butcher knife (especially those who were practicing the horizontal shuffle). Jason Vorhees was a BIG, UGLY dude who killed counselors and others who were doing the nasty or even thinking about it with a treasure trove of items, though he was, of course, partial to his machete. Leatherface was a BIG, REALLY UGLY dude who killed any teenagers that came close enough, not really dependent of their activities. None of these characters ever spoke, ever laughed, ever did anything but KILL!!! Freddy was totally different -- he was cheeky, had a dark humour to him. He didn't just charge ahead with his weapon of choice (workman's glove with blades), he described exactly what he planned on doing, how and then kept his promises. I have to agree that after the third in the series, they really started stretching the plots to a new low each time (and why does his death always have to be so stupid?!). I just don't see how they'll find anyone else to take over; I realize Robert is getting up there in age (he didn't look young back in my day, for God's sake) but if they don't have him, I don't think they should bother. What next, "Leprauchan" with Verne Troyer!!! God help us all!!! (I may have given them an "new" idea!)

Connie on Jul 23, 2008

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.



Subscribe to our feed -or- daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main account on twitter:
For the latest posts only - follow this one:

Add our updates to your Feedly - click here

Get the latest posts sent in Telegram Telegram