Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Meet the new Freddy Krueger


Jangler

Recommended Posts

http://scifiwire.com/2009/04/is-jackie-earle-haley-rea.php

story.jpg

Jackie Earle Haley confirmed to play Freddy in Nightmare on Elm Street

The Hollywood Reporter's Risky Biz blog on Friday confirmed the rumor, first reported by Bloody-Disgusting and Latino Review, that Watchmen's Jackie Earle Haley will play Freddy Krueger in New Line/Platinum Dunes' upcoming A Nightmare on Elm Street reboot.

Haley, who won rave reviews playing Rorschach in Zack Snyder's Watchmen, takes over the role of the iconic screen villain from Robert Englund, who originated the character in Wes Craven's 1984 first Nightmare movie.

Samuel Bayer is directing the relaunch, which was written by Wesley Strick.

Haley had been one of several actors on the shortlist to play the part. But scheduling issues almost scotched the deal: Haley is also working on the TV series Human Target, which led to conflicting dates.

Krueger, as fans know, is the serial child killer murdered by angry parents who returns with a burned face, striped sweater, fedora and razor glove to terrorize teens in their dreams.

Bloody-Disgusting also reported that Kyle Gallner (A Haunting In Connecticut) is in final talks to play Quentin, the podcast host and Johnny Depp character from the original Nightmare. (We remember him as Beaver on Veronica Mars.)

Shooting on the remake, from the same people who produced the successful Friday the 13th reboot, begins May 5 in Chicago.

Haley was nominated for an Oscar for playing a sex offender in 2006's Little Children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow.....Hollywood has to remake everything, don't they? What a joke.

We watched that terrible Will Ferrell basketball movie and were surprised to see JLH in it...playing white trash perfectly. He really fell off the face of the earth after the Bad News Bears movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...