Freddy Krueger being marketed to children in the 80's.

[Tenshigure]

May 23, 2018 10:07:41 GMT -5 pegasuswarrior said:

The marketing is not a comment on how effed up it was. It just wasn’t so eggshell sensitive/fragile-minded then. It’s merely further evidence of how society has now changed. The evolution of fear. People can’t wait to dissect everything and find a way to be afraid, offended, or appalled by it institutionally. Freddy was just Freddy, scary as heck and therefore cool. It wasn’t anything like “I can’t be the person I want to be because of this outrageous symbol of societal oppression and real-world abuse.” It wasn’t weird then just like it’s not weird now to not be able to browse corners the internet without seeing someone offended by a media gesture because of the larger message it somehow connotes. Evolution of fear.

One thing that always gets on my nerves is how certain people will rag on today's parents because 'back when they were kids, they'd go outside and play until the street lamps came on,' and that 'their parents weren't hovering over them and had to be present whenever they did anything'. Problem is, in today's society many people see unsupervised children as either miscreants or neglected by their parents, and will call the authorities to address it instead of letting them be. I would love to send my kid off to the woods to play and have fun with other kids in the neighborhood her age, but unfortunately I simply can't because of the aforementioned reasons. 

Sure, things are scary out there in the world as a parent, but the only difference between now and back when we were kids that age is access to communication and the internet, which exposes a broader spectrum of crazies voicing their opinions on nonsense like this. It's the same reason why I don't hold back on my swearing when I'm with my kid (I do hold back out of respect for other people's kids of course), or allow her to sit and watch movies or shows that some would find questionable but I and my wife feel she is mentally ready to handle. Sure, we will use our best judgement for things we don't think she's ready for (she's watched plenty of horror movies via MST3K/Rifftrax for example), but each child varies and it should be handled as such.

When it comes to Freddy being marked to us back in the 80s...well, that's just how it was back in the day because it was cool. Nowadays, horror film makers are more out to gross people out with torture porn or unnamed antagonists that have no redeeming qualities. Sure, the likes of Freddy, Jason, Chuckie, Pinhead, Michael, and the Xenomorph were scary as all hell, but they also had charisma and were cool in their own individual rights. Today, outside of perhaps Jigsaw or Freddy Fazbear, there really aren't many horror 'icons' being made today.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

I seem to recall even seeing children's Pinhead and Cenobite costumes from Hellraiser.

[Paul]

May 23, 2018 7:48:01 GMT -5 dav said:

Now I really wish we got to see a Saturday Morning cartoon version of the franchise. Might have just turned out more like the Beetlejuice one though.

So it would have turned out awesome?

[WoodStoner1]

80s I think was when the "antihero" or "cool villain" was picking up steam. You had Freddy, yes, but also Darth Vader as well as the Joker being just as marketed as Batman was when the 1989 movie came out.

[WoodStoner1]

A Nightmare cartoon in the vein of say, Mighty Max, or the pre-meddled Real Ghostbusters would have worked.

[wildojinx]

Freddy being marketed to kids was odd, but even stranger was when Arnold Schwarzenegger became the spokesman for the Presidential Fitness Test in around 1990. At that point, none of Arnold's most well-known films were exactly known as "family-friendly" (by contrast, Stallone's Rocky films were pretty much family-friendly for the most part). I guess we can just say that a lot of stuff that wasnt really for kids was still marketed to them in the 80s (and beyond, remember that the Nolan Batman trilogy had tons of kid tie-in products).

[Deleted]

Same thing with Five Nights at Freddys now a days...My 4 year old daughters are forbidden from FNAF stuff but I catch them on youtube videos occasionally and they know the characters without ever playing the games...Children and guard killing anamorphic mascots...It's all pretty vile that it is marketed towards children.

[The Barber]

May 23, 2018 10:07:41 GMT -5 pegasuswarrior said:

The marketing is not a comment on how effed up it was. It just wasn’t so eggshell sensitive/fragile-minded then. It’s merely further evidence of how society has now changed. The evolution of fear. People can’t wait to dissect everything and find a way to be afraid, offended, or appalled by it institutionally. Freddy was just Freddy, scary as heck and therefore cool. It wasn’t anything like “I can’t be the person I want to be because of this outrageous symbol of societal oppression and real-world abuse.” It wasn’t weird then just like it’s not weird now to not be able to browse corners the internet without seeing someone offended by a media gesture because of the larger message it somehow connotes. Evolution of fear.

Uhh...what are you talking about?

That 'evolution of fear' crap has been going on for centuries. People were (and very much still are) afraid of what they don't understand. It is human nature.

BTW, I read somewhere that Fifty Shades Of Grey got a PG like rating in France. Different cultures for different people.

[Tom Turkey]

At least the Robocop toys and games are a somewhat less egregious example than Freddy marketed to kids, since Robo's a hero (putting aside the violent content of the Robocop films).

[Deleted]

May 23, 2018 6:25:10 GMT -5 Kevin Hamilton said:

We honestly had toys of just about every R rated movie. I owned action figures of both John Rambo and John Matrix.

Rambo and Matrix had some epic battles in my tv show/movie/cartoon figure wrestling league.

80s was a great time to be a kid, anything went as far as toys. lol