Francesco Mirabelli
•Years after the tragic ending of the first film, Nancy's house is bought by a new family. The protagonist has increasingly terrifying nightmares every night until the discovery of the girl's diary and the death of people close to him make him realize what is happening: Freddy Krueger is back, and his thirst for revenge is even more implacable.
The novelty of this film lies in the fact that Freddy this time does not try to kill the protagonist, but uses his body and his fear to escape the dream dimension and kill in reality. Definitely a bad film, as the deaths are among the cruellest (if we exclude the first one) of the entire series. We are still in the 80s and Freddy is not funny at all. Notable is the scene where the psychopath comes out of the protagonist's body tearing it from the inside with his sharp claws, and then, after telepathically sealing the door, butchers his best friend under the helpless eyes of his own parents, who, hearing the boy's screams, only see the wood of the door splinter under the 4 blades of the ruthless Krueger. Upon waking, the protagonist finds himself completely covered in blood, in the room of his mutilated friend, with his parents still screaming from behind the door and the police arriving… Sholder's direction is not bad, and yet despite so many interesting ideas such as the scene of the runaway bus (which finds citations in various films and even in an episode of The Simpsons), and Freddy's innovative "gore" transformations, it does not reach the visionary and terrifying levels of Craven. It's cold. Uncommunicative. Too detached from the vital parameters of "A Nightmare on Elm Street" that we all know. Robert Englund is definitely below par and his performance is limited to a few clawings and a kiss, between a few swear words, given to the protagonist's girlfriend during the final confrontation. Overall quite negligible.
Comments