How the Director of A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2 Feels About the Divisive Film Today (Exclusive)

Almost every film franchise has at least one poorly received installment, but there’s nothing as divisive as the first sequel in a series, as it marks the moment in which a large number of fans were disappointed or worse. For the “A Nightmare on Elm Street” franchise, that installment is the first sequel, 1985’s “A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge,” which was always going to have an uphill battle at best after Wes Craven’s 1984 original. Craven’s film brought European-influenced dream logic and (literal) nightmarish imagery to slasher film, thus starting its own trend in the form of the “rubber reality” film, as well as a host of imitators. The film’s box office success meant that a sequel was inevitable, however, the film ran into problems from its conception: Craven didn’t want to return, early ideas for the script were thrown around and then abandoned, and at one point, studio New Line Cinema wasn’t even sure they were going to bring back Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger.

Obviously, cooler heads prevailed at that point, but it’s a good indication of how popular “Freddy’s Revenge” was on Jump Street. During a recent exclusive interview with director Jack Sholder on the eve of the release of the complete 4K Blu-Ray box set of the “Nightmare” franchise, the filmmaker confessed that New Line’s motivation in making the sequel was that “they just wanted to put out a script called ‘Nightmare on Elm Street 2’ with a character named Freddy, not even necessarily played by Robert Englund.” When Sholder’s film, written by David Chaskin, was finally released, its reception was mixed and only diminished as the franchise gained more creative, financial, and cultural success. Even early discussions of the film as a stealth queer film failed to get it re-evaluated at first. Ultimately, though, “Freddy’s Revenge” found its audience, and it’s thanks to these new fans that Sholder has now fully embraced the divisive sequel.

It’s important to remember that in the 1980s sequels were a more gradual affair, and although numerous films began to make room for a possible future film, none of them were yet being made with a concrete idea for another installment. With “A Nightmare on Elm Street,” New Line Cinema only sought to leave some room at the end of the film for a sequel, so the playing field was wide open for “Freddy’s Revenge” on a creative level. As Sholder recalled, the pressure for the sequel came from himself more than anyone else:

“There was never any pressure on me to make a movie that was going to be a hit. There was a pressure on me, self-imposed by me, just to make a good movie. And the only thing they said was ‘keep Freddy scary, keep him dark, make him dark… both lighting-wise and metaphorically.’ say, ‘Well, it won’t be as good as Wes’s movie, but I’ll do it anyway.'”

“Freddy’s Revenge” is ambitious in stepping away from the story of Craven’s film and seeing what other abilities and concepts the Freddy Krueger character could tackle. There’s also no doubt that, although cinematographer Jacques Haitkin shot both this sequel and the original “Nightmare,” the films have a uniquely different visual language. However, even then, sequels were generally understood to adhere to the formula of the original film, and the only criticism of “Freddy’s Revenge” that Sholder maintains to this day is that his sequel’s break from the “Elm Street” formula sets it apart too much:

“If you look at it in the context of all this, you say, ‘Well, this one doesn’t quite fit because they broke the rule,’ that Freddy goes out into the real world. Freddy doesn’t do that. Because if Freddy did that, then we wouldn’t have ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street’ because (the teens) wouldn’t have to go to sleep for Freddy to kill them. So that idea is kind of a dead end.”

When audiences noticed the film’s queer subtext, Chaskin denied that the themes were intentional and instead blamed star Mark Patton, who was a closeted gay man at the time of filming. Thanks to “Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy” and Patton’s 2019 documentary “Scream, Queen! My Nightmare on Elm Street,” the truth became clear and Chaskin admitted the issues were deliberate on his part. As for Sholder’s knowledge of these issues, he remained largely unaware until he met Patton at a convention celebrating the film’s 30th anniversary a decade ago. It helped Sholder come to terms with the film after years of basically ignoring talk about it, as he explained:

“I hadn’t really followed anyone’s thinking, I didn’t really care what anyone thought about the movie. (…) And I remember doing one of my first interviews about the movie with these two women who had a podcast, I think specialized in ‘Elm Street,’ and they got some good comments. And then some people said ‘Oh, it’s not that good. It doesn’t fit with the rest of the series.’ And (these women) said ‘If you look at it that way way, you’re not going to enjoy it.’ But if you look at it as its own movie, then it’s really good.” And they were the first to say that. And then it seemed like from there people started to see it that way.”

As it happens, it was Sholder’s oversight of the film’s new 4K remaster that allowed him to embrace “Freddy’s Revenge” more fully:

“When I was in Los Angeles overseeing this 4K restoration, particularly with this new Dolby Atmos track, I said, ‘It’s a really good movie.’

Although Sholder believes he would “probably say ‘The Hidden’ was my best movie,” he has now embraced his ‘Elm Street’ legacy. “It’ll be in my obituary. The first line of my obituary will say that I directed ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street 2,’ but I thought I did a really good job.”