Nightmare centers around teenage Nancy (Heather Langengkamp), her best friend, her best friend's boyfriend, her own boyfriend (Johnny Depp, in his first role ever), her police chief father (John Saxon), and of course..the child murdering, fedora wearing Freddy Krueger (immortalized by Robert Englund). One night the four teens all have nightmares in which a man with a claw, red and green sweater, fedora, and horrible burn marks chases them through a boiler room. At first, no one really makes much of it, but after one of them is dragged across the ceiling and gutted by an invisible foe that leaves claw marks, they begin to worry. As the story progresses, they discover the identity of their assailant is a child murderer their parents killed years ago, come back for revenge.

Craven is at the absolute top of his game (although truth be told I've never seen Hills Have Eyes), and the suspense in Nightmare is excellent. Nancy is a better than average horror heroine, and has pretty good chemistry with Freddy (the best three in the series of seven are the ones with her). The script is darker in tone than any of the subsequent movies (except maybe New Nightmare), but it caters perfectly to the directorial style and Englund's portrayal of the clawed Krueger. As for Englund, he brings more than enough creepiness and evil to the part, and even in the later, crappy sequels he was excellent. His body language, coupled with his raspy voice, is brilliant. The part may not have been written specifically for him, but after seven movies, I can't imagine anyone else doing it. Maybe Malcolm McDowell, but the character would be quite different. Additionally, his look is perfect, and I think gives him a certain subtle touch that more prolific horror villains like Jason or Leatherface lack. Also of note, this film, and most of the other Freddy films, have very low body counts. Freddy tends to play with his victim, and has the most creative kills I've ever seen (Wishmaster is in the same ballpark), although the first installment's murders are slightly less extreme than later kills.

Set design is phenomenal, and several of the sets were repeatedly reused in the sequels. The cinematography is the best you'll find in a horror flick, and the special effect, when there are some, still look good today. But what's really great are scenes like the claw in the bathtub or the incredible final scare.

All in all, Nightmare is one of the scariest films you're going to find, with more than a few moments that will stick with you. Krueger is indeed the definitive horror villain, with a great actor filling out a great costume, spouting great dialogue, and packing a relaly fucking intimidating weapon.

Spotlight comparison: Wes Craven
His best, bar none. However, his directorial style is still raw, and the direction is better in later films, but this is easily his best final product. Not many can make a character that lives forever. In fact, Wes had a little trouble letting him go. Take a look at the janitor in Scream, played by Wes, wearing a very familiar sweater.

Overdone, Pretentious grading:
Acting: 9 Englund gives the best horror performance to date (save possibly Norman Bates, but that`s a different type of horror), but his second victim and Nancy's mother both leave something to be desired.
Direction: 10, not Craven's best, but better than most that isn't Craven.
Writing 10, first appearance of Freddy, instant 10.

Final thoughts:
If you have even a remote interest in movies, you should see this one. Among the best and scariest horror flicks ever made, and featuring one of the most memorable characters of all fucking time.

A+

Friday the 13th is about a camp by Crystal Lake (inexplicably named Camp Crystal Lake) that is trying to reopen after many years of fires, bad water, and a couple of grisly murders. Well, one of the counselors doesn't even make it to the camp, and the others, particularly the horny ones, start dropping like flies. Near the end of the movie you find out (its not exactly hard to figure out once the character is introduced) that the killer is middle aged Pamela Vorhees, avenging the drowning of her son many years ago. She hates the camp, and the horny counselors associated with it, because the two counselors that should have been watching little Jason were too busy screwing, and he drowned. So of course logic dictates that all teenagers are inherently evil, and should be brutally murdered on sight. Especially them nekkid ones.

The direction is unbelievably average for horror flicks, borrowing bits from both Halloween and Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The murder weapons include a hatchet, a knife, a machete, and a bow and arrow. The special effect are piss poor, but the movie is fun, and actually foregoes the obligatory nudie shot. Betsy Palmer is great as Pamela Vorhees, but the cast of victims (including Kevin Bacon) are campy and lacking in talent (especially Kevin Bacon). This is an eighties slasher, folks, don`t expect anybody to do a whole lot more than scream, screw, and die. And if that's not a good enough excuse for shoddy acting, it's also a Kevin Bacon movie. A Kevin Bacon horror movie. Case closed.

I'm giving an entire paragraph to Crazy Ralph, cause he's funny, he's crazy as hell, he's right about the camp, and, he's Crazy Ralph! Nothing quite funnier than a drunken elderly doomsayer. Also, he's the only male character with any significance that survives. Yep, the feeble drunk old man outlasts all the strong young teens, and the camp owner.

Really, Friday isn't anything special aside from Palmer, and the novelty of being the first Friday movie.wait, the final scare (and first appearance of Jason) is brilliant, catches you completely off guard, and has just been spoiled for newbies by a semi-skilled asshole reviewer. Besides all that, Friday is just another walk in the slasher park.

Overdone, pretentious grading.
Acting: 5, and only that high because of Palmer
Direction: 7, it gets the job done, and a few of the murders (and that spoiled final scare) are cleverly done.
Writing: 6, mixed bag on this one, the dialogue is crap, but the murders and scares are well scripted.

Final Thoughts:
If you like slashers, this one is better than average with a little novelty appeal for being the birth of Jason. Also, Kevin Bacon gets cut up, and that's a plus. Despite the technical flaws, it's still enjoyable.

C+

Candyman (Tony Todd, in an incredible performance) has traits similar to both Freddy Krueger and Dracula, yet he remains wholly unique. He is the spirit of a man brutally murdered years ago, who exists only because people believe he exists. So, when belief starts to waver thanks to nosey Helen (Virginia Madsen), he decides to make an appearance to reaffirm belief in his existence. Candyman has a slightly higher than average gore factor, but a fairly low body count. The character is creepy, and at the same time all too cool. The few special effects are perfect (the bees will creep out just about anybody. Unless you have some weird bee fetish, in which case, go to hell), and the murders are all necessary to the story, while at the same time being really fucking scary. The idea behind Candyman, about urban legends and belief and what not, is an interesting idea by itself, but the execution is what makes this a truly excellent horror flick. That and how incredibly fucking scary his hook looks.

There are really only two people that need to act in the movie, and the both do it well. Tony Todd was perfect as Candyman, and no single second of his screen time was wasted. His delivery was perfect, as was the look. Virginia Madsen was also spectacular, and her final appearance in the film is particularly memorable, thanks in no small part to the costume department. The victims don't much have to act, as Candyman doesn't really waste any time on a kill. And that hook is fucking creepy as hell.

Clive Barker penned the story for Candyman, which was then converted to a screenplay and directed rather well by Bernard Rose. Candyman is incredibly suspenseful, as Rose gives you just enough of the Candyman to keep you both dreading and wanting more. The theme puts the infamous Halloween bit to shame, and fits so perfectly with the feel of the film. Everything really comes together for the Candyman. Plus, he's got that scar ass hook.

Spotlight comparison: Tony Todd
I haven't yet seen the Candyman sequels, but his role in here is most likely better. It also blows away his bit in Final Destination. it's a good ways ahead of his very good part in Wishmaster, and inches out his role as Grange in the Crow. Really, his role as Candyman is up there with Englund and Perkins in the horror hall of fame.

Overdone, pretentious grading:
Acting: 10 Just listen to the opening line from Candyman and you're sold.
Writing: 10 cool concept, as done by Barker. really, only King and Craven can match this sort of concept.
Direction: 10 This movie is fucking scary, and even more suspenseful. It perfectly achieves its goals, and I can't find a flaw in the direction.

Final Thoughts.
Candyman, Candyman, Candyman, Candyman, Candyman. Damn this was a good horror flick. Probably the scariest I've seen, with an excellent villain, and an above par heroine. A gutsy flick you can tell the makers took their time on, Candyman delivers what you rent a horror movie to get. Also, it ignores just about every modern horror clich‚. And that hook will creep you out.

A+

No one will argue against Hitchcock being one of the greatest directors of all time.however, very few people will argue that Psycho is even mildly entertaining in the thirty minutes before Norman Bates shows up. Perkins carries the character as kind of a good ole down home kid.with something else behinds the scenes.

Bates is scary in that he's potentially real. While Freddy, Jason, and the Candyman are obvious works of fiction, Psycho could very easily be based on a true story. Bates is very nearly a real human being, and Perkins puts in a stellar performance. Almost too stellar.

The shower scene. Some very cool shots in here, including a different take on the obligatory titty shot. The second and last murder of the film is much less suspenseful, and instead hits us with a Jason esque shock value move. Really, most modern physical (meaning non Krueger/Candyman/Cenobite etc.) horror is derivative of one or both of the murder scenes in Psycho.

The entire cast, minus Perkins, is forgettable but not bad. The writing is dull whenever Norman is out of the picture, and the movie follows suit. A major failing of Psycho is the shear amount of time it takes before we even meet Norm. After that, its okay to wait because the semi concealed creepiness of Bates is interesting. Vera Miles stealing money and not being chased is just boring, particularly in a horror movie. Additionally, it takes entirely too long for anybody to figure things out. Norman gives quite a bit away unintentionally, but nobody really gets it till the last ten minutes. Also, the ending is heavy handed as someone basically gives you a Scooby Doo like synopsis of Norman and why he did the things he did.

Overdone, Pretentious Grading:
Acting: 10 Really, it could have been Norman on the telephone for two hours, it still would have been a ten.
Writing: 8 Some things took too long to happen, and the ending was sloppy and out of place. Still, the rest is brilliant.
Direction 10 Alfred FUCKING Hitchcock.

Final Thoughts:
Psycho is a classic for several reasons. The first of which, its good. The second of which, its really the first great serial killer movie. Thirdly, most movie audiences are too dumb to be annoyed by the crappy attempt at closure, and therefore leave the film on a good note. I thought the beginning and end of the flick were crap, but the middle was some of the best cinema to date. Psycho is a brilliant horror flick with a slightly large share of faults, but the surprise twist near the end and Perkins's stellar performance let it grab a near perfect score anyways,

A

Wishmaster is the story of an evil genie, or Djinn, who wishes to bring his kind to Earth. In order to do so, he must first charge the stone that used to imprison him with souls by granting wishes, or even mild request like "I'd like to see..", then granting three wishes to the human that freed him. Without wishing, he can't do much, but he's completely immortal, so he has some time. The Wishmaster is played perfectly, hell, better than perfectly, by Andrew Divof. Early in the film, the grotesque if incredibly cool looking Djinn, acquires a human form that give Divof much more to do with body language. Really, the Djinn, while not the same TYPE of villain, is played in the league of slasher greats like Krueger and Candyman.

The acting, aside from Divof, Englund, Hodder, and Todd, is poor, but not awful. And the death scenes are of Nightmare on Elmstreet caliber, but much, much more plentiful. Direction is fair, but not overly important; Divof and the death scenes are what make Wishmaster a good film. The writing is half and half: the Djinn has several excellent lines, and coupled with Divof's delivery, they're Kruger caliber. Also, Todd and Hodder both have some good lines, which is kind of neat as it allows you to see that Jason actually has pretty good delivery. Englund is always great. On the flip side, however, the heroes all sound like characters out of crap modern horror flicks in the vain of Soul Survivors or The Ring.

And interesting thing to note is that Todd, Hodder, and Englund are all victims of Djinn. It's a little odd to see Candyman and Krueger on the receiving end. Hodder, surprisingly, looks quite a bit different without the hockey mask, so there's no real oddity in seeing him trounced.

Again, I'd just like to mention the truly spectacular and plentiful death scenes.

Pretentious, Overdone grading:
Acting: 8, because most scenes have Divof or Englund
Direction: 7, really, just incidental. Surprisingly unimportant for a horror flick.
Writing: 8, Todd and Divof both have some great lines.

Final Thoughts:
Different than average horror flick, worth it for the death scenes alone, but the great lead, steady writing, and cameos make it all the better. Shoddy heroes keep it from a perfect score.

A-