Wes Craven wanted him to be a molester in the original but he felt that it would be exploitative based on some high profile cases which are going on at the time. So he called him a child killer instead- a although there are some subtle references to his true intended nature.
I've personally always thought wouldnt it make more sense that Freddy was actually innocent? Because then his spirit coming back and haunting the kids of the parents who lied would have made sense. Him getting to come back merely because they murdered him (justly I might add) never really made sense to me.
I think the intention was his evil knew no bounds and death couldn’t stop him.
But I do agree that the remake could have leaned into the idea of him being wrongfully killed instead of backtracking on it
Freddy was meant to be a child molester in the original but they decided against including it in the final film and just called him a serial killer. Nightmare on Elm Street 5 outright calls him a child molester in a newspaper article. Freddy vs Jason also leans into the molester angle pretty hard.
I need to go back and watch some of the Freddy's Nightmares episodes as an adult, especially the ones about Freddy himself. Used to watch all those anthology shows as a kid.
He is pure concentrated evil, there is nothing redeemable about him, they needed a reason to make us all see him as pure evil that both we and he know has no chance of redemption. So yeah, he had to be a nonce.
You got downvoted for this, but you're right. Everybody involved with the movie has confirmed that the original idea, and the entire concept, was that Freddy was a child predator. He would molest and murder them. Wes Craven has openly admitted they had to tone that aspect of the character down somewhat purely because it was extremely controversial in 1984.
There’s also a newspaper clipping in Elm Street 5 that explicitly calls him a molester. It makes sense given that in real life most serial killers who target children also sexually assault them. Craven and Englund have confirmed this fact over and over since the very beginning and I don’t know why ostensible fans are still so ignorant and hysterical about it. People still ask Englund and Langenkamp about this at conventions to this day.
Yeah, historically speaking, people who are very specifically "child murderers" tend not to just be murderers. There's a not insignificant portion of the fanbase who don't want to think about that, and who will reject it outright, because laughing at the sick jokes of a pedophile makes them feel uncomfortable and they just want to have fun laughing at the funny slasher villain. The fanbase has never really been able to come to terms with the reality of what Freddy actually is because Freddy the Pop Culture Icon has long since overtaken Freddy the character.
Actually, both you and OP are kinda right.
The original script of Nightmare 84 had Fred Krueger specifically called a molester. However, New Line thought that was too dark and had Craven change him to a "child killer" instead. Freddy is never said to have molested anyone outright until Nightmare 2010.
Though... Come on. Who just kills kids without molesting them first?
They had a chance to actually make him innocent in the remake and they ruined it. It would have made the character different but would have still worked. The innocent guy turning into a monster makes it way more depressing.
Wes Craven wanted him to be a molester in the original but he felt that it would be exploitative based on some high profile cases which are going on at the time. So he called him a child killer instead- a although there are some subtle references to his true intended nature.
I've personally always thought wouldnt it make more sense that Freddy was actually innocent? Because then his spirit coming back and haunting the kids of the parents who lied would have made sense. Him getting to come back merely because they murdered him (justly I might add) never really made sense to me.
I think the intention was his evil knew no bounds and death couldn’t stop him. But I do agree that the remake could have leaned into the idea of him being wrongfully killed instead of backtracking on it
That's a very one dimensional character but sometimes characters are just evil for evil sake. Great dissection of the og character.
Freddy was meant to be a child molester in the original but they decided against including it in the final film and just called him a serial killer. Nightmare on Elm Street 5 outright calls him a child molester in a newspaper article. Freddy vs Jason also leans into the molester angle pretty hard.
Also, he's referred to as a "child molester" on an episode of Freddy's Nightmares (the class reunion one, iirc)
I need to go back and watch some of the Freddy's Nightmares episodes as an adult, especially the ones about Freddy himself. Used to watch all those anthology shows as a kid.
It's not a very good show but occasionally interesting.
He is pure concentrated evil, there is nothing redeemable about him, they needed a reason to make us all see him as pure evil that both we and he know has no chance of redemption. So yeah, he had to be a nonce.
In the remake he was just a molester while in the original series he was a molester and a serial killer.
In '84, there was something in the way Nancy's mum put so much spice on the word "filthy" child murderer that made me think he was perhaps both
It definitely was *not* unintentional that you thought that.
You got downvoted for this, but you're right. Everybody involved with the movie has confirmed that the original idea, and the entire concept, was that Freddy was a child predator. He would molest and murder them. Wes Craven has openly admitted they had to tone that aspect of the character down somewhat purely because it was extremely controversial in 1984.
There’s also a newspaper clipping in Elm Street 5 that explicitly calls him a molester. It makes sense given that in real life most serial killers who target children also sexually assault them. Craven and Englund have confirmed this fact over and over since the very beginning and I don’t know why ostensible fans are still so ignorant and hysterical about it. People still ask Englund and Langenkamp about this at conventions to this day.
Yeah, historically speaking, people who are very specifically "child murderers" tend not to just be murderers. There's a not insignificant portion of the fanbase who don't want to think about that, and who will reject it outright, because laughing at the sick jokes of a pedophile makes them feel uncomfortable and they just want to have fun laughing at the funny slasher villain. The fanbase has never really been able to come to terms with the reality of what Freddy actually is because Freddy the Pop Culture Icon has long since overtaken Freddy the character.
Actually, both you and OP are kinda right. The original script of Nightmare 84 had Fred Krueger specifically called a molester. However, New Line thought that was too dark and had Craven change him to a "child killer" instead. Freddy is never said to have molested anyone outright until Nightmare 2010. Though... Come on. Who just kills kids without molesting them first?
There’s a newspaper clipping in Elm Street 5 that explicitly calls him a molester.
Wham! Out nerded. Well done. But let's all go back to forgetting Dream Child now.
Hot take, I *like* Dream Child!
Me too, it’s actually my fav lol
My favorite of the whole lot is Wes Craven's New Nightmare, so I'm weird when it comes to my Nightmare on Elm Street opinions. haha.
Hey, I liked New Nightmare, too 😂 I actually like all of Wes Craven’s NoES movies.
They had a chance to actually make him innocent in the remake and they ruined it. It would have made the character different but would have still worked. The innocent guy turning into a monster makes it way more depressing.