Is Michael Bay dark horse dilirious?

Why would a guy throw the dice all or nothing not twice bit thrice? obviously because He has gamblers fever. Transformers two in my opinion was the top `09 pound for pound bang for your buck summer blockbuster, but does that make Michael Bay's alleged "Green thumb" for high-fi action applicable for the resurrection of a cult horror saga? Being an early eighties baby I was fertile ground for the first nightmare on elm street seed of horrific dreamscape myth. By the early 90's the saga ended with Freddy's dead and had brief revisits in `94 and `03, but now this movie making fool has a seemingly midas touch that in my opinion will wither upon contact of this ever dormant franchise.

I feel this way for a number of reasons, the first and foremost is that that last elm street movie was made outside of the story continuity and if I'm not mistaken was ill received. Unlike the "Halloween" franchise, the Elm street saga has been thoroughly explained and fleshed out while rob zombie used his occult aesthetic to add deeper detail to the myers psyche. The jason franchise saw a recent successful revival because the Voorhees character is stone cold and silent, invoking terror by his actions more so than his appearance (the same can be said of Myers, making both pure slasher films) while the Kruger`s persona is a much more animated, demonic and torturous figure who's power derives from his victim's fear within the dreamscape. A critical component in what made the Nightmare On Elm Street saga so good was what actor Robert England Brought to the Freddy Kruger character, I doubt one can so easily replace that combination of humor and horror England so throughly blended, In the preview just hearing the demon Kruger's hoarse but normal voice just didn't move me.

My advice to Bay, stick to Hi-Fi and pure slasher, leave the horror to the truly creepy people...