They changed the photo from AVGN Freddy to (I guess) a movie Freddy. It USED to be AVGN, but it changed is all.

HEY! Why did you guys change the photo? Retards...

AVGN rocks.. Check out the avgn game that has him commenting on the suckage of his own game. Downloadable at his website.

ahah James Rolfe should sue them for a trillion bucks for stealing his freddy character haha

were did they find that picture?! did they just googel search Nightmare on Elm Street and randomly found that picture of avng!?... Or did they actualy know who that is?... anyways. Go go go Angry video game nerd!!! xD

AVGN ain't gonna be too happy 'bout this.

AW MAN, I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY PUT THE VIDEO GAME NERD!!!
Wayta go, James!!!!

Not only does Rolling Stone magazine suck nowadays, they have to use someone else's picture too. Congrats (I guess) to Angry Video Game Nerd.

u took that pic straight from google without checking the source

he's gonna take u back to the past

Alright, do a Google image search for "Nightmare on Elm Street" and the "James Rolfe" Krueger is on page 2 and fits it's purpose in this article best without much editing. It is scary, you can't tell that it's not the same Krueger from the movies, there is no text to be cropped out, and I doubt very much that there is a stock photo of an official Krueger that the author could have purchased in Photoshop and used, but if I'm not mistaken this usage is acceptable under fair-use (even Rolfe's usage is considered in-parody) and demonstrates Newline's series just as well as any official Krueger would have, plus it's bringing some viewers to this article who otherwise wouldn't have known of it's existence. (probably not by design).

As far as the article itself, I would have to say that the "box office" needs to stop "prophesising profits" and just be sure that if their movie doesn't sell very well, that they can at least pay everyone involved and be happy. If some "professional" actor costs way too much to hire, pick someone else, hell, boost a talented Youtuber's "acting career" if you must, if someone can entertain people there with no budget, imagine what they could do when backed by one. If a director is incompetent, fire him. Peter Jackson is very talented, but even in his case, some fans of Tolkien's books feel that it was butchered for film. That is unavoidable.

Also, people shouldn't go by what professional critics say, from what I can tell, VIEWERS have mixed ratings and reviews about "The Golden Compass" and most negative reviews were by those who had either read the book and felt that too much was left out, or by religious fanatics who would rather live in a world where the "Holy Bible" is the only book, movie, and TV series.

Often, a director has to cut MANY hours out of a book when converting it to the big screen due to space constraints, often that's in the form of sub-characters and development of characters other than the main. I have yet to watch the film or read the book, but going by what users say, I'll have to see for myself (Eragon, for example, cut a lot of unnecessary corners and made unnecessary in my opinion, perhaps enough where they couldn't possibly film the sequels in any way that's related to the first. However people who haven't read the book enjoyed it as a typical medieval fairy-tale).

Don't put absolute and complete trust into professional critics. For one, they have seen so much that it's easy to bore them (movies are great, but if you watched them at least 8 hours per day as your job you might feel that some are too much like others and bring nothing new to the screen, whereas the target audience may not have seen a similar movie yet), and two, they can be paid to say something is great or something sucks by any studio with enough money to buy and sell them. If the company that makes a movie is related to the one that provides your paycheck, you're going to add a few more stars to your rating than you would otherwise (it'll be expected, kind of in the same manner that Pepsi fired Britney for possession of Coke). Many times a professional critic will rate something "two of five stars" (just an example, some critics do disturbing things with their thumbs for a rating system) when 90% of the audience rates it four and five stars.

In summary, reviews and ratings by other viewers and professionals alike can give you a general idea whether or not you'll like something, but if you're even so much as leaning in the direction, you should formulate your own opinion on something AFTER you see it. If you like the trailer, go ahead and watch it.

If the "box office" makes more on a movie than it cost to produce, they profited, whether they met their expectations or not.

They shouldn't expect more of our money if they cut too many corners and we didn't like their movie. They have to keep in mind that their "projected millions" have to come from somewhere (our wallets), and that to rush out a bad product in an attempt to make a quick buck is bad business, and people will remember that come the next product they produce.

James' link is right, that's from his video. They didn't credit him, though. The Nerd kicks so much ASS.

AVGN PWNS ALL OMFG

The nerd fuckin rules the gaming world.

omg! angry video game nerd! that guy is awesome and very talented.

Pepo is right. James Rolfe is my friggin hero.

That picture above is not form freddys movies but from angry video game nerd review nightmare on elm street game.Be sure to check some of his videos,hes genius!

Everytime I saw that New Line logo animation it made me think of Nightmare On Elm St. and how I got hooked on horror when I was a kid. So many great movies over the years like Boogie Nights and Rings, but I always thought of Mr. Krueger when that logo came on-screen.