Nightmare 2 - Die Rache
Ein Teenager wird in seinen Träumen vom verstorbenen Kindermörder Freddy Krueger verfolgt, der ihn besitzen will, um seine Herrschaft des Terrors in der realen Welt fortzusetzen.Ein Teenager wird in seinen Träumen vom verstorbenen Kindermörder Freddy Krueger verfolgt, der ihn besitzen will, um seine Herrschaft des Terrors in der realen Welt fortzusetzen.Ein Teenager wird in seinen Träumen vom verstorbenen Kindermörder Freddy Krueger verfolgt, der ihn besitzen will, um seine Herrschaft des Terrors in der realen Welt fortzusetzen.
- Auszeichnungen
- 2 Nominierungen insgesamt
- Mr. Webber
- (as Thom McFadden)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
The teenager in question is the nerdy, insecure Jesse (Mark Patton). This is probably why Freddy chose him as his vessel, because he is vulnerable and susceptible. Jesse also lives in the house on Elm Street Nancy used to live in. Freddy says he needs Jesse because Jesse has the body, and he - Freddy - has the brains. Jesse never kills anyone, though; it is always doing Freddy doing the killings, so I guess he uses Jesse to lure his victims. It still didn't entirely make sense why he needed a host, but it does allow for some excellent scenes in the form of make-up and prosthetics.
Jesse is seeing Lisa (Kim Myers - who, by the way, looks so much like Meryl Streep in this movie!). I found her a really nice character, who was caring and considerate. She is also a very strong character, who stands by Jesse.
This sequel might not be as good as the original, but it is a worthy entry in the series with some great kill scenes, a constant creepy atmosphere, excellent makeup, an awesome party scene, and a great performance once again from Robert England as Freddy. I also thought Mark Patton was really good portraying the troubled and confused Jesse. In general, this is a highly entertaining supernatural horror slasher.
But culture, and particularly youth culture, in the 1980s was considerably different, certainly far less conservative and anti-creative. In those days, The Cure were a big thing, and even the most basic of pop sludge was far more creative than what we have today. Not to mention that it was far easier to make dodgy films and get them released theatrically.
A Nightmare On Elm Street Part 2 picks up five years after the original, although it was a rush-job filmed less than a year after said original was out of the theatre. The film company, at that time the independent startup known as New Line, saw a quick and easy meal ticket that only required them to convince Robert Englund to submerge himself in what looks like three tons of multi-coloured latex. So the idea of a decent script, decent actors, or decent photography, went right out the window.
Which is kind of sad, really, when you consider that this is the only Freddy film in which an original premise is used. You might want to skip the rest of this paragraph if you have yet to see it. In it, a young man (whose behaviour is consistent with repressed homosexuality, in one of those hilarious plot coincidences) has just moved into the house from which Nancy originally dealt with Freddy. With the help of the sort of girlfriend any other male (and even some females) of this age would want to climb atop of at every opportunity, our hero attempts to fight off Freddy (and his own gayness), which in turn creates some very interesting plot devices. The moment when our heroine is holding up a carving knife at Freddy, who gives her a graphic and terrifying demonstration of the fact that she'll kill her (confused) lover if she kills Freddy, could have been one of the most horrific moments in the entire series. I am not quite convinced that it isn't, given that the only other episode in the series that was vaugely adult after this point was Part 3.
Unfortunately, the actors hired for these roles cannot act their way out of a wet paper bag. The only cast member with acting skills that even compare to Robert Englund's would be Marshall Bell. I am convinced that his turn here as the (gay) gym teacher was what got him hired to be in Total Recall and StarShip Troopers. Mark Patton (no relation to the Mike Patton who leads Mr. Bungle or the Mike Patton who was an early cast member in You Can't Do That On Television) is terrible - his only talent, as such, is to scream like a seventy-year-old woman. The actors who play his family look as if they belong on a cheap knock-off of Family Ties. The best actor in the whole piece was the budgie, who seemed to decide he would rather explode than be in this idiotic film a second longer.
When all is said and done, Robert Louis Stevenson said it much better in The Frightening Tale Of Doctor Jekyll And Mister Hyde (although there are no shortage of adaptations to that work which suck more than this). Normally, I would give this effort a three out of ten, but it gets two bonus points because it is like no other episode in the Nightmare canon, and that is a damned good thing when you put it alongside episodes four through seven.
Jesse is the new kid in town and he has moved into Nancy Thomson's old house. Not too soon is he having the same horrific nightmares that Nancy was having about Freddy Krueger. Jesse confides in his neighbor/crush, Lisa, she doesn't believe him until she starts having the nightmares herself. She researches Freddy and finds out that he is after Jesse's body and wants to take it over. But she may be too late when he does enter Jesse's body and is after her and all the rest of the kids at Jesse's high school.
A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge isn't bad, just compared to the series, yeah, it's the worst in that category. The story had something, but it wasn't delivered well. But just think about what A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge was compared too with it's first film that was an ultimate classic. So maybe that's why we have such a problem with the film. But I would recommend it if you wanna see the sequels, but if you're watching it without knowing the first story, I don't think you'll enjoy it.
5/10
What I liked about this film was the filmmakers tried to do something different, and it almost killed the series. The plot and storyline was too complex and byzantine for you average horror film. Much of the film's hidden context and meaning would go over the heads of most horror film fans. If Sigmund Freud were alive today he would've had a field day trying to figure out this one. Sadly underrated and unfairly neglected..
Strongly recommended
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesNew Line Cinema originally didn't ask Robert Englund to return as Freddy Krueger and refused to give him a pay raise. A stuntman was cast as Freddy at the start of production. After two weeks of filming, Robert Shaye realized this was a terrible lapse in judgment, fired the stuntman, hired Englund, and met his demands.
- PatzerThere is an instance in which the same scene is used twice: after the gym fight when Grady and Jesse are holding the push-ups pose in the field, as punishment (at around 10 mins). This is the same scene used for when Jesse insults Schneider in the locker room (at around 28 minutes). The same people pass behind the fence.
- Zitate
[the kid approaches Freddy Krueger around the pool, standing up for the other frightened kids]
Do-Gooder: [holding his hands up, walking to Freddy] Just tell us what you want, all right? I'm here to help you.
Freddy Krueger: Help yourself, fucker!
[as Freddy slices his shoulder and throws him against the flaming barbecue pit]
- Alternative VersionenThe original Australian VHS release features only Christopher Young's main title playing over the end credits.
- VerbindungenFeatured in The Best of Stephen King's World of Horror (1986)
Top-Auswahl
- How long is A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Pesadilla en Elm Street 2: La venganza de Freddy
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 3.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 29.999.213 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 2.865.475 $
- 3. Nov. 1985
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 29.999.213 $
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
