Talk:A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge

Does anyone have a better reference for the homosexual subtext? The article I chose is a good link, but it only discusses that briefly.--Sean|Black 06:39, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Tagline

I think that the taglines belong. They are a part of the film. They are accurate, factual information. They do not consist of personalize opinion or some for of personal view. They are connected to the movie by relevance. By relevance I mean that it was the showmanship for the movie. By representing showmanship it earns a rank of relevance to the film and this page. Taglines are on all the other films, they belong on this one as well. Bignole 00:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Fine, but not in their own section. That's very poor organization. Put it in the intro.--Sean Black ^(talk) 00:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

But when you have more than one tagline that has been used, and is often found on films, you develop a list of taglines in the intro. Since there is more than one tagline I think that if it is going to sit in the introduction section then it should atleast stand out some. It is not merely information that is repeated on every NOES page (i.e. This is the ___ film in a series of ___ films released by....). This is separate information that is unique to this film and this film only. It should atleast stand out from the redundant information that plagues each of the films' introductions. Bignole 00:52, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

We don't need to list every tagline that was used. That's what the IMDb is for.--Sean Black ^(talk) 00:55, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

AlrightyBignole 00:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Urban Legend?

How is this film based on an urban legend?

POV?

"Part 2 though, for the most part should be praised. It's success paved the way for future sequels, and the producers were bold enough to have Freddy play more of a secondary role to Mark Patton's character Jesse. By doing so, Freddy retained his chilling mystique and frightfulness. It was only until later sequels that the character gained a more slapstick approach, and ultimately lost his once truly terrifing persona. 2003's Freddy vs Jason saw a return to the more darker side of Freddy's personality, as seen in Part 2."

This entire paragraph seems far too opinionated, even if some of its points are valid. I'm removing it for now, but I suppose it could be added back in with a different tone.65.35.157.31 20:29, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Discussion about cast

I'm holding a discussion at Talk:A Nightmare on Elm Street (franchise)#Cast in regards to the cast list for the film series as a whole (and the comics if need be).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Title is wrong

The correct title of this film is: "A Nightmare on Elm Street, Part 2: Freddy's Revenge". קולנואני (talk) 16:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

A request has been made.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

It's been corrected. The comma was not included, as the comma is not actually part of the name.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:33, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Move? (2011)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page not moved per discussion. - GTBacchus^(talk) 18:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

---

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge → A Nightmare on Elm Street, Part 2 –

• I have received messages that "The actual film says "Part 2". The poster did not include this in the title, but the actual film says "Part 2" and that is what we go by when naming articles. That's also what the copyright is.". Or leave the comma out? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

The comma should not be there. That's just how they separated them in the copyright because there are other "Freddy's Revenge" titles copyrighted (they are all associated with the film, like a soundtrack and individual song titles). The actual title of the film, as seen in the opening credits, is "A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 23:40, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose on this requsted move. Steam5 (talk) 04:38, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

  On which part? The suggested move with the comma, or the suggested move with "Part" added back in?  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:48, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose why would you chose "part 2" instead of "2"? "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2" is more concise, and people referring to the movie, don't seem to call it "part 2" in my experience. 65.93.15.213 (talk) 06:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
  • We would choose "Part 2" because that is the actual name of the film. We don't short film titles because we want them "more concise" unless you're talking about films like Borat. The film is calle "A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy Revenge", it's not "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:45, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
    • I didn't say anything about including "Freddy's Revenge" in the title. I don't think it's necessary. 65.93.15.213 (talk) 05:31, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
      • You cannot just ignore parts of a title for no reason at all.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 06:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
        • WP:COMMONNAME, WP:OFFICIALNAME, WP:PRECISE -- sure you can ignore parts of the title. These are the reasons; just look at Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb , which is called Dr. Strangelove by Wikipedia. 65.94.77.96 (talk) 07:13, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
          • Only applies to films with extremely large names. This is not the same thing.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose (and a Support) – Titles on posters and in credits can be stylised and don't necessarily reflect the copyrighted title or the title by which the film is known. Here are the titles that Nightmare films were submitted to the MPAA under by their American distributor: [1]. The current title exactly matches its official American distribution title. Betty Logan (talk) 08:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC) EDIT: I would support a move to A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy Revenge since it gets twice as many google hits as the current title; I think it's important to keep the "Freddy's Revenge" bit since it will save us a disambiguation problem when they do the new sequel. Betty Logan (talk) 09:03, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose My DVD of the film says A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. No 'part 2', don't know where that has come fromDarkwarriorblake (talk) 11:11, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

  It's in the actual film. Here are the screenshots (which I'll have to delete when this is done). Screen capture from start of the film.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:14, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

According to the link Betty provided, it was submitted to the MPAA as A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. In the UK it was submitted as Part 2. I'm not sure why the actual footage differs.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:02, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

According to the US Copyright Office, they have "Part 2: Freddy's Revenge". Now, there is another copyright what omits the "Part" from the title (see here), but that was copyrighted in 1990, which could mean it was for a new release on VHS. Here is the search result for "Freddy's Revenge". The ones with "Part 2" included are all copyrighted in 1985, when it was released.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:00, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The screen credit should trump the copyright, I would say, since the article refers to the film while the copyright filing might have legal purposes apart from clear reference. The DVD sleeve is marketing material and can have uncorrected mistakes. --Ring Cinema (talk) 18:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move (2012)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 08:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

---

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge → A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2: Freddy's Revenge – The actual copyright of the film is this title. The opening credits of the film say "Part 2", and the credits on the actual film posters say "Part 2". Only some marketing ads don't include the "Part" in the title, but, as I stated above, it was originally copyrighted into the title. Here is a link to the original copyright in 1985. As far as searching goes, I don't think this will disrupt anything, but I feel that it should be the accurate title. This was discussed a year ago, but the initial request was based on an inaccurate title that had a comma and appears to confusion the real issue. I point to the copyright, the poster credit (not the poster artwork), and the actual opening title of the film as reason to include "Part" in the title.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:14, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose per 2011 requested move, it should just be A Nightmare on Elm Street 2 per WP:PRECISE. -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 03:01, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Since when did we just remove subtitles from film article titles? Never, that would be when. Any film with a subtitle (excusing overly long film titles like Dr. Strangelove or Borat) always has the subtitle included. In this case, the film is actually called "ANoES Part 2: Freddy's Revenge". PRECISE doesn't say just cuts out subtitles. It isn't not speaking about copyrighted titles, so much as it is talking about not naming more general topics overly specific titles.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

We always remove it, it if it is the common name, WP:UCN ; Length is not an issue. If we always have subtitles as part of the name, then long titles would not be exempted. Length is only an issue if you use WP:PRECISION, and if you use that, then this title should be stripped of excessive length as well. -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 06:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you point to some community consensus that specifically states that film subtitles are removed from article names? I don't seem to see any at WP:NCF. So, you're argument that we should just remove the subtitle doesn't appear to have any substance, as I can point to over 100 films where the subtitles are in the article title. The only cases where they are removed, are exactly for what I pointed out above...for length of the name.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 07:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose – the packaging, the poster, and most of the linked movie sites omit the word "Part". Dicklyon (talk) 05:10, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

The poster's word art omits the word "Part". The poster's credits do NOT omit the word "Part" (look closely at the larger version of the poster). Any actual credits or copyrights do say "Part".  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 11:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Gay subtext, not LGBT(-related) film

There is no category for films with gay/LGBT subtext. This film is not LGBT or LGBT-related and some have put it under this category, and I have deleted it. If there are sources directly saying this is an LGBT film (like a film guide book) then it should be cited. If not, I kindly ask the admins/watchlisters to add a subtext entry in the article, but state that it is not LGBT (none of the characters are LGBT, no LGBT romance/relationships etc.). Leopea (talk) 05:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

After the stuff I just added from the BuzzFeed article, with the screenwriter reiterating his earlier admission that this was deliberate, do you want to reconsider? Daniel Case (talk) 05:29, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110904162007/http://www.attitude.co.uk/news/viewnews.aspx?newsid=1144 to http://www.attitude.co.uk/news/viewnews.aspx?newsid=1144

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:50, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205140638/http://cc.usu.edu/~alexjack/viddiedreviews/nightmare2.html to http://cc.usu.edu/~alexjack/viddiedreviews/nightmare2.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.afterelton.com/movies/2010/05/nightmare-elm-street-gay

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:58, 24 June 2017 (UTC)