A Nightmare on Elm Street
New Line Cinema | Release Date: April 30, 2010
5.0
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 328 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
110
Mixed:
105
Negative:
113
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
7
ChemikerAug 14, 2023
Ремейк, с сохранением знаменитых сцен из оригинала, так же ГГ это Нэнси (мне прошлая героиня нравилась больше). Что радует раскрыли предысторию Крюгера, и в принципе я так и понял и когда ну скажем так сделали намек, я уже все понял, забавноРемейк, с сохранением знаменитых сцен из оригинала, так же ГГ это Нэнси (мне прошлая героиня нравилась больше). Что радует раскрыли предысторию Крюгера, и в принципе я так и понял и когда ну скажем так сделали намек, я уже все понял, забавно что сначала Фреда считали невиновным. На удивление новый актер, Крюгера с гримом выглядит еще страшнее, ну и звучит грознее, даже как то воспринимаешь его по другому немного. Тема с микроснами это они четко придумали, на 5-10 секунд как то дич происходит, но вот что герои постоянно стремятся заснуть это как по мне слишком, как можно заснуть когда ты знаешь что умрешь, да и моментально, мне не понятно. Ремейк как я и говорил первой части, с небольшими изменениями с намеком на продолжение, кассу собрал нормальную, но вот вопрос, а где оно?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
Sosmooth1982Jan 6, 2023
I really liked this new nightmare. I wish there was more action in it but still pretty good. I hope this is the start of a new Freddy movie series.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
FilmanwaltNov 4, 2022
hmm...I didn't think it was that cool. Somehow there was no fright at all, ran along relatively unimportantly. I've only ever seen fragments of all these Freddy, Jason, etc. films on TV and perhaps didn't choose a good example as a "startinghmm...I didn't think it was that cool. Somehow there was no fright at all, ran along relatively unimportantly. I've only ever seen fragments of all these Freddy, Jason, etc. films on TV and perhaps didn't choose a good example as a "starting point"?

2/5 nightmares.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
royalguy07Oct 24, 2022
In general the CGI effects from this era aged so poorly compared to their 80s counterparts. New Freddy design was pretty menacing for a little but he fell into old stale habits by the end. The kills were very brutal and bloody. Also there isIn general the CGI effects from this era aged so poorly compared to their 80s counterparts. New Freddy design was pretty menacing for a little but he fell into old stale habits by the end. The kills were very brutal and bloody. Also there is no need to completely 100% re do iconic scenes (Bathtub scene). Can't believe they honestly tried to go for a Freddy is good angle for half the movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
tellmikeyyAug 9, 2022
The movie becomes more interesting and watchable in the second half when it’s just Quinton & Nancy. Some good visual moments and this Krueger isn’t as bad as some say it is.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
Narwhale73May 30, 2022
Meh, I guess it was okay as far as horror remakes go. The story was okay and the effects were great, but my biggest was the characters. The acting was decent as far as I could tell, but the characters are all around worse than the charactersMeh, I guess it was okay as far as horror remakes go. The story was okay and the effects were great, but my biggest was the characters. The acting was decent as far as I could tell, but the characters are all around worse than the characters that they are remaking. Especially Nancy as she went from one of the boldest final girls in slasher history to some crybaby who has mental break downs just looking at Krueger. It really sucks since it's almost impossible to have a good Nightmare movie without a strong protag. At least Glenn is a useful character in this version. The atmosphere was there but the music wasn't. There were a noticable amount of potholes and questionable writing choices, but that's something inherent to all nightmare movies.

Overall, I think it's a fair one to watch if you're binge watching all the Nightmare Movies. However as a remake, it's pretty flawed, especially in the comparison of the masterpiece that is the original.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
kyle20ellisMar 26, 2022
I wasn't expecting the remake to Nightmare on Elm Street to be as good as the classic original, but I was expecting a decent enough film. As a remake and on its own terms, this Nightmare on Elm Street is a mess. Is it the worst remake outI wasn't expecting the remake to Nightmare on Elm Street to be as good as the classic original, but I was expecting a decent enough film. As a remake and on its own terms, this Nightmare on Elm Street is a mess. Is it the worst remake out there? Not quite, Psycho and Wicker Man were worse. But it is among the most pointless, at least to me. This time round, the story is over-simplistic, the characters shallow and dull and the script jumbled. And apart from one, the acting is terrible, especially from Kyle Gallner. The editing in general could've been tighter while the effects lack clarity and distract from the atmosphere rather than enhance it. Speaking of the atmosphere, it seemed bland here, the nail-biting suspense and build ups seem very subdued and I don't think I remember being shocked by any scene from this movie. The only redeeming quality I feel is the efforts of Jackie Earl Haley. Robert Englund's performance was iconic and wonderfully creepy so Haley had big shoes to fill, and while he is a little too small for the role his makeup is believable and he does make a valiant attempt with his characterisation. All in all, pointless and messy. 2/10 Bethany Cox… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
Josephgamers65Oct 31, 2021
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010 Reboot is an a-ok solid reboot of the 1984 A Nightmare on Elm Street I think the very Beginning of this movie is really good but then when they kill off Jesse and Tina it feels like a Friday the 13th movie this movie could be so much better in the second and third act if the actors did there part it feels like there are just doing it just to make money does not feel like they care but Freddy I really do like Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy is what I wanted because I feel like he can play freddy over Robert Englund of course Robert Englund is great as freddy my issue after three does not feel like Freddy feels like there are playing for comedy which i do not like this remake for me this Freddy i Like that he is scary the voice is awesome how the filmed it the lighting is amazing perfect but than we got the horrible child **** in this which is terrible to see if that was not in here this movie would of been better and also people would respect this flick but the characters are friday the 13th so you don't really care what happens yeah so this remake i did enjoy wish they did not do the child stuff they did but all round a solid remake that i think is solid for what it was doing so I give A Nightmare on Elm Street an B-… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
0
FilipeNetoMay 8, 2021
For those who have seen and enjoyed the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" franchise, making a remake is, in itself, a redundant and disposable idea. Making a remake just because there are other kinds of special and visual effects withoutFor those who have seen and enjoyed the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" franchise, making a remake is, in itself, a redundant and disposable idea. Making a remake just because there are other kinds of special and visual effects without being able to be a little better than the original is a mistake.

The film begins with the deaths of two teenagers and the heroine fully convinced that there is something terrible happening, and that it kills them without them wanting to. Of course, for us there is no secret: it is Freddy Krueger who, through their dreams, is taking his revenge on those who killed him, years ago. The script, thus, recycles the story of the original franchise, without adding anything innovative or doing better. In fact, the film even copies entire scenes from the first film, reinforcing the lazy and uninteresting aspect that the film takes on.

The cast is led by Jackie Earle Haley, who replaces Robert Englund in the role of the steel glove villain... but the truth is that there is no love like the first, and Englund will forever be the ideal actor for the role. In fact, Samuel Bayer should surely be dreaming (or having nightmares) when he allowed the writers to give Haley such bad material, where the character is so mistreated. Without any seriousness or ability to intimidate, Krueger is a ghost of the character he was in the opening film. The rest of the cast does not stand out: it does what it has to do on characters who are nothing more than smoke figures, with no personality or any striking feature. Rooney Mara is the most resonant name, but she looks like an alien here, not quite knowing what she does or why she is really here.

Technically, it is an uninteresting film at all levels, clearly starting with Haley's bad makeup: it manages to be less realistic than a Carnival or Halloween rubber mask. The standard cinematography and the poor editing, with a series of badly placed and untimely cuts, also do not help, but the bad sound and the misuse of sound effects was what tired me the most: the film has more squeaks than an oil-free door and tries its hardest to use sound to make the audience jump in the chair, a feature that horror has used until exhaustion due to the director's inability to work with the atmosphere and tension. Krueger's voice also seems anything but authentic and frightening. The costumes and sets are fine, but they can't save the movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
LuciusMcGibbonMay 30, 2013
It's funny; of the main aspects that determined my experience with this remake, I can't if some are pros or cons... which leaves me with mixed feelings once the credits roll.

First and foremost: the new Freddy... good or bad? Which oneIt's funny; of the main aspects that determined my experience with this remake, I can't if some are pros or cons... which leaves me with mixed feelings once the credits roll.

First and foremost: the new Freddy... good or bad? Which one trumps the other: my positive reaction to Haley's capable, if novel handling of the horror icon, or my belief that Freddy minus Robert Englund is an almost fatal downgrade no matter how unavoidable?

Do I feel like this was a necessary addition to the list of post-classic horror flicks being remade for the new generation, or do I feel like the series suffered enough forced modernization with "vs Jason"?

Do I feel like the "scares" betrayed lazy script-writing, or do I concede that it's all been done and simply appreciate the nigh-impeccable execution?

All told, no matter what the verdict, it will be middle of the scale. It's no shining piece of cinema, nor is it a fly-covered Rob-Zombian turd... I just couldn't tell you which side of "perfectly average" this movie falls on. If you expect it to stand alongside the original, maybe you'd best not bother with the remake lest you be disappointed by the deviations from the source material. On the other hand, if you can see past the limitations inherent in remaking a pillar of late-century horror for these aesthetically jaded, cinematically desensitized times, you might just find some value.

Seriously though... bravo Haley, but there's just no getting around the decidedly Englund-less quality of this movie.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
Cementer200Sep 27, 2020
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) is an average movie. the plot of the movie is good and gets better as the movie goes on. But the characters are so bad they weigh down the whole movie. this movie should be a psychological thriller about howA Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) is an average movie. the plot of the movie is good and gets better as the movie goes on. But the characters are so bad they weigh down the whole movie. this movie should be a psychological thriller about how Freddy is just a bad memory.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
JLauSep 25, 2020
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Well-acted remake focusing more on the paedophillic side of Freddy, with a lot more menace, far fewer jokes and a lot more trying to stay awake.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Toasty87Jul 10, 2020
This reboot hurts my eyes and my soul it feels very cheap and rushed a few scares but not much.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
MglovesfunJul 2, 2020
While not a complete disaster, it compares poorly to the original. Fans of the original will hate it. No idea what if anything a younger audience would like about it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
James92Jun 5, 2020
This is about as bad as remakes get. Forget Elm Street, Forget Freddy, the film is a real Nightmare all
On its own.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Im_just_playingMar 27, 2020
Excuse me for my language, but what the f*ck I've watched??? It doesn't feel like an original movie from 1984. And Freddy in this version acts like a pedophile, so yea. Thanks, I hate it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
Rcavey92212Mar 23, 2020
Look alot of people crap on this flick and I mostly get it. It's definitely a poor representation of one of my favorite films and every scene they try and recreate is an utter failure. Plus Jackie Earle Hailey (Watchmen) just isnt great asLook alot of people crap on this flick and I mostly get it. It's definitely a poor representation of one of my favorite films and every scene they try and recreate is an utter failure. Plus Jackie Earle Hailey (Watchmen) just isnt great as Kruger he's not bad but he lacks the charisma and boldness of Englund. As for the film it's not terrible just overly mediocre and best viewed as a separate film than part of the franchise. It lacks the imagination and creativity of even the worst chapters. That being said it's got some good stuff Rooney Mara (Carol) is really great as Nancy. She gives the character a relatable feel that's both vulnerable and resilient at the same time. Cutie Kyle Gallner (Ted State) is good as her boyfriend of sorts and Katie Cassidy (Arrow) is also good as one of her friends. Only Thomas Dekker (Kaboom) feels miscast. Sexy Kellan Lutz (Twilight), Connie Britton (Nashville) and Clancy Brown ( Pet Sematary 2) also star. Directed by first time feature director Samuel Bayer of Green Day music videos, his inexperience shows with some questionable pacing and just a sense of blah for most of its running time. Ultimately the movie is still entertaining. It's stylish with inventive cinematography, strong performances and some really inspired bits like the micro naps amongst others. All in all its really just not the mess people make it out to be.

Budget: $35m
Domestic Box Office: $63m
Worldwide Box Office: $116m

3/5… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
9
SpacemanGaryFeb 26, 2020
I prefer this to the original, freddy is scarier and making it blatant that he was a child molester was a smart move. Goode acting + good scares + good effects + good score + good freddie makeup + good production design + good lighting + goodI prefer this to the original, freddy is scarier and making it blatant that he was a child molester was a smart move. Goode acting + good scares + good effects + good score + good freddie makeup + good production design + good lighting + good script + good pacing + good tone = great movie.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
bfoore90Feb 3, 2020
In terms of being a reboot, its not bad. Directed by acclaimed music video director Samuel Bayer, "Nightmare" offers up some scares and Bayer's direction and Haley's performance but thats not enough to lift this film above a "been there, seenIn terms of being a reboot, its not bad. Directed by acclaimed music video director Samuel Bayer, "Nightmare" offers up some scares and Bayer's direction and Haley's performance but thats not enough to lift this film above a "been there, seen that" story while not even trying to do anything new with the character.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
JonSnow2049Aug 20, 2019
Worst Nightmare movie ever. It is real, real, real bad remake. This film has no atmosphere of original movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
DavidHoltzerAug 6, 2019
90% of the mixed or negative reviews on this movie are totally biased.This film was much better and way more efficient than any other movies in the franchise.This adaptation is one of my favourite horror movies of all time.It's terrifying90% of the mixed or negative reviews on this movie are totally biased.This film was much better and way more efficient than any other movies in the franchise.This adaptation is one of my favourite horror movies of all time.It's terrifying and has great effects as well as much better characters and story than in the original.The first ever A nightmare on Elm street was goofy and wasn't serious at all, so it didn't have any impact on me but bad affect from cringe.Another big milestone in this franchise's life was Freddy vs. Jason which was a terrible mess.This is the only Freddy Kruger movie that i enjoy.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
3
JPKJul 4, 2019
A Poor Remake
This remake is completely unnecessary, stupid (Not in a good way), boring, not scary, and mediocrely acted.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
1
MrTacoBobJul 11, 2017
No just no! They failed so badly! The movie was so crappy. It ruined a great series. I haven't watched this movie in a while but I remembered it being boring and very awful.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
robertoiglesiasJun 18, 2017
This is a horrible movie! The new Freddy Krueger sucks, the deaths suck, Nancy sucks, and so does everyone else! This is an insult to the original movie!
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
S1r-R34lMar 4, 2017
A travesty of a reboot. Bad direction, lazy two-dimensional characters that the actors cannot breathe life into. Save your pennies or better yet but the original '80's movies box set and see how it should have been done.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Castiel_AngelOct 9, 2016
A cheap knockoff version of the original Nightmare on Elm Street. This movie is nowhere near even remotely scary. Robert Englund MADE Freddy Krueger. Don't get me wrong Jackie Earle Haley did a good job but it just doesn't have that originalA cheap knockoff version of the original Nightmare on Elm Street. This movie is nowhere near even remotely scary. Robert Englund MADE Freddy Krueger. Don't get me wrong Jackie Earle Haley did a good job but it just doesn't have that original theme. Jackie is probably also the ONLY actor in this move that made it interesting the rest of it was just ughh. The writing oh my god don't even get me started on that it was freaking horrible and that is a major understatement. The only reason this is not getting a zero is like I said Jackie Earle Haley is interesting in some way just not as original as Robert Englund… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
EpicLadySpongeApr 22, 2016
Not even good ol' Freddy Krueger can save this movie from being an absolute mess. With a story that lacks any sense, Michael Bay once again producing a horror film, and ruining the good name of the franchise, this one falls asleep too quicklyNot even good ol' Freddy Krueger can save this movie from being an absolute mess. With a story that lacks any sense, Michael Bay once again producing a horror film, and ruining the good name of the franchise, this one falls asleep too quickly and soon.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
geo333Oct 31, 2015
The remake of the classic horror film Nightmare on Elm street is a nightmare of a film. Due to lackluster of story, intense and horror; the remake only points to one direction that is Elm Street is not scary anymore at least in this film.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
0
BenHawkes113Oct 2, 2015
While Jackie Earle Haley is a great choice for Freddy post Robert Englund, this film is just terrible all round. Half-assed performances, nothing that scares, over relies on jump scares that no one falls for. Over relies on CGI blood and goreWhile Jackie Earle Haley is a great choice for Freddy post Robert Englund, this film is just terrible all round. Half-assed performances, nothing that scares, over relies on jump scares that no one falls for. Over relies on CGI blood and gore as well, and just has that Michael Bay feeling to it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
8
TheQuietGamerSep 24, 2015
What we have here is a rare surprise; a remake that actually provides a solid twist on the original. Obviously it doesn't live up to Wes Craven's horror classic, but there's plenty to enjoy here for any fans of Freddy Krueger. That's becauseWhat we have here is a rare surprise; a remake that actually provides a solid twist on the original. Obviously it doesn't live up to Wes Craven's horror classic, but there's plenty to enjoy here for any fans of Freddy Krueger. That's because Jackie Earle Haley does a fantastic job as the character.

Sure, he's no Robert Englund, but Haley gives an excellent performance with this slightly new take on the character. His one-liners are on point and he's just the right amount of creepy. He reminded me why I found the character so fascinating in the first place, and why I fell in love with the original series.

I also have to give the movie props for at least trying to be a serious horror movie. Yeah there are some self-aware funny moments here and there, but it certainly does try to scare you. Unfortunately it does not succeed. The jump scares are predictable and there's nothing here to instill fright. It thankfully manages to avoid turning Freddy into the comical villain some of the later sequels turned him into, but the movie's overreliance on modern horror movie scare tactics that just don't work prevent it from actually being scary. You don't come into this movie looking for frights. You come for the Krueger character and the twist on his fiction.

There are plenty of homages to the original here. It follows roughly the same path and there are plenty of new takes on classic scenes. The real change up comes from Freddy's backstory. This time around the movie isn't afraid to shy away from the pedophilic elements that were only hinted at in the original. It's (thankfully) not very graphic with these elements, but it's no secret what's going on.

Ultimately where the story stumbles is in that none of the characters outside of Freddy are really fleshed out. The parents are just sort of there, and Nancy (Rooney Mara) and Quentin (Kyle Gallner) are the only two teens who get any real screen time. The others are just there to add to the body count. Even with that though we never really get to learn much about them. The characterization falls short.

Still though as a huge fan of most of the original movies I can't find too much that I dislike here. It may be lacking scares and the non-Freddy characters are flat, but when it comes to a new take on one of my favorite characters in all of cinema the movie delivers. Freddy is what attracted me to the series in the first movie. To see him handled well here makes me happy, even if the rest of the film around him doesn't fare so well. I would love to see Haley take up the role again. It's certainly a lot better than most of the sequels to the original.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
5
YoutubeTGWSep 11, 2015
I felt it was unnecessary when they tried WAY TO HARD to reboot the story of the first movie done by Wes Craven. by "too hard" I mean they try to use the same story but try to make it different by turning the Springwood Slasher into a ChildI felt it was unnecessary when they tried WAY TO HARD to reboot the story of the first movie done by Wes Craven. by "too hard" I mean they try to use the same story but try to make it different by turning the Springwood Slasher into a Child molester which I could easily see pissed off a bunch of fans of the original films. Jackie Earle Haley did anAMAZING job acting as Freddy Krueger, though he didn't have the smart ass one liners like Robert England's Freddy Krueger. The film changes from one to the other one the first cattiness gets killed off you swap off to Nancy who is boring like a junkie who's constantly stone throughout the entire film. they should of had a completely different and original story continuing the Trilogy instead of just starting over with this and this is a reboot. I heard that Jackie Earle Haley signed on to do three movies as Freddy Krueger, not sure if it's three movies after this one or three including this one but IF they do make more they better try a new story instead of rebooting the old stories instead of modernize them.
The dream sequences were the BIGGEST FAIL! It just look like they were just being teleported instead of having nightmares, if we were going to copy and "Modernize" the story of the first movie trying to make things interesting instead of taking something from the old movie and "changing it" Example: both movies that are squishy floors that turned into goo but in this remake it wasn't white petals on the stairs that turn into what looks like mashed potatoes, both movies had Freddy's face being pushed out of the wall towards Nancy, movies had the blonde chick die the EXACT SAME WAY! Chris is pretty much Christina gray (Tina) from the first movie by Wes Craven.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
RobertOBrienAug 7, 2015
Drink every time there's a plot hole, lazy jumpscare and an actor giving a 1-note performance, and by the 45 minute mark, you'll be proper haggard.

This sure did give me nightmares. Nightmares about how they could've done so much with thisDrink every time there's a plot hole, lazy jumpscare and an actor giving a 1-note performance, and by the 45 minute mark, you'll be proper haggard.

This sure did give me nightmares. Nightmares about how they could've done so much with this story, thanks to modern technology, but did nothing with it. I was at least expecting to be impressed with the dream sequences, but even that was uninteresting. The lack of inspiration and creativity leaves me dumbfounded. The script and actors seem so bored with themselves, and it certainly transcends onto the audience.

I would rather sit in a theatre for 95 minutes, leaning over with my mouth wide open, drooling onto the floor to see how much saliva would pile up. A much more interesting event than watching this excuse for a horror film.

If your movie's only saving grace is an actress from Gossip Girl, you know your movie is a huge waste of thought. This is only getting a 2 because of Katie Cassidy, and high production values. Well made, terribly written.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
SolInvictaJun 28, 2015
The dark tone provides an intriguing backdrop for this new adaptation of Freddy Krueger, but the narrative itself fails to deliver on nearly every level.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
ydnar4Apr 19, 2015
I loved the original. It is probably my favorite horror movie ever. This remake is just a lame copy. For the most part all the exciting parts and characters are ripped off the original movie. I liked the idea to reboot Freddy Krueger with aI loved the original. It is probably my favorite horror movie ever. This remake is just a lame copy. For the most part all the exciting parts and characters are ripped off the original movie. I liked the idea to reboot Freddy Krueger with a new actor after Robert Englund made the character famous but it just didn't work. I hope they don't try it again.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
Meth-dudeMar 25, 2015
I personally found the movie entertaining and I think it is a good reboot.The characters are stereotyped teenagers and the acting for them is bad but the gory effects and the deaths were good.
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
7
horcrux2007Jan 25, 2015
It's no way a perfect remake or a perfect stand-alone movie, but it gets its job done pretty well. The acting from most of the cast is solid, especially the actors who played Jesse and Nancy, and I really liked the new Freddy Krueger. He hadIt's no way a perfect remake or a perfect stand-alone movie, but it gets its job done pretty well. The acting from most of the cast is solid, especially the actors who played Jesse and Nancy, and I really liked the new Freddy Krueger. He had a lot of great lines throughout the movie. The gore and visual effects are the movie's strongest aspects. It's a beautiful film to look at. The scares themselves are hit-and-miss because this primarily relies on jump scares. There are a couple of scenes with good tension, however.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
0
DartboardJan 20, 2015
Glossy production design and cinematography have added a certain glamour to what should have been a depraved film, which just doesn't work. It barely feels like an attempt at something sinister. Freddy Krueger - who once transcended theGlossy production design and cinematography have added a certain glamour to what should have been a depraved film, which just doesn't work. It barely feels like an attempt at something sinister. Freddy Krueger - who once transcended the boundaries for a slasher villain - is boiled down to a mumbling entity with no personality and no wit, almost as if the screenwriters believed the lack of would create a creepier, "distinct" Freddy. Completely misses on what made Krueger a compelling and enduring figure in horror cinema, and its characters exist solely to rush the story along. This is a movie that has nothing to say, nothing to justify its existence, and nothing worthwhile to see. The only silver lining to come from all this is that it didn't rake in enough dough to greenlight a sequel.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
Gina_HJul 8, 2014
the remake and it didn't speak on anything new. It just copied the original but watered it down. i prefer watching A Nightmare on Elm Street 2010 ,than Carrie 2013
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
Cornelius68Jul 7, 2014
this movie is absolutely terrible ,This is the worst yet from Michael Bay's horror production company Platinum Dunes, which also brought you rubbish re-makes of Halloween and Friday the 13th and Carrie
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
1990Jul 6, 2014
Worst Unnecessary Remakes I Seen In My Life ,Psycho (1998). Carrie (2013). Planet Of The Apes (2001). The Fog (2005). A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010). Prom Night (2008). The Day The Earth Stood Still (2008). Flubber (1997). The StepfatherWorst Unnecessary Remakes I Seen In My Life ,Psycho (1998). Carrie (2013). Planet Of The Apes (2001). The Fog (2005). A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010). Prom Night (2008). The Day The Earth Stood Still (2008). Flubber (1997). The Stepfather (2009). Clash Of The Titans (2010). The Wicker Man (2006)… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
StrangerinaJul 1, 2014
This movie cannot build up suspense at all, and the intensity of the Freddy scenes is completely gone and traded for in-your-face jumpscares. The plot is a much simpler version and none of the symbolism prevalent in the original made it here.This movie cannot build up suspense at all, and the intensity of the Freddy scenes is completely gone and traded for in-your-face jumpscares. The plot is a much simpler version and none of the symbolism prevalent in the original made it here.

Freddy's motivations also seem a lot more petty. Here Freddy's revenge is much more direct, as in he wants to kill the kids for ratting out on him.

These motivations show in Freddy's interactions with the kids, he whinges and moans about how poor child molester got denounced. While Jackie Earle Haley was a pretty good choice to play the role of Krueger, this script just gave him bland to pathetic lines. Robert Englund's Freddy Krueger's sick sense of humor didn't really make it to this movie.

The visuals are decent, almost overblown, but when you don't have the suspense and intensity, it's hardly worth more than 2 stars.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
1
Kylenine1Jun 16, 2014
A waste of not only time, but money. Even though the remake had its moments the storyline isn't strong enough to compare to the original film. There's nothing much to say about this film except that it has bad acting, the special effects wereA waste of not only time, but money. Even though the remake had its moments the storyline isn't strong enough to compare to the original film. There's nothing much to say about this film except that it has bad acting, the special effects were okay, the storyline was terrible and the direction was the only thing that was good. The music was terrible because we've been heard it all before and we've been there and done that.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
marcmyworksJan 11, 2014
Sadly it was felt that this film franchise needed a reboot and thus the 2010 NOES was born. Jackie Earle Haley's Freddy is nowhere as scary as Robert Englund's and the cast proves to be pretty yet bland.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
mishabridunDec 24, 2013
A surprisingly good remake of the original with a refreshing modern taste and pretty good actors. I liked this movie's story more than I did the suspense, but the action and special effects weren't bad at all. The one thing that I didn't likeA surprisingly good remake of the original with a refreshing modern taste and pretty good actors. I liked this movie's story more than I did the suspense, but the action and special effects weren't bad at all. The one thing that I didn't like about this movie is that Freddy's makeup/mask didn't look nearly as good as in the original. Overall, I think this movie could have been worse and was a pretty good remake from the original, but focuses more on the story and not just the kills.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
Zman6495Jul 22, 2013
No. The remake is not as good as the original movie. However, I did still enjoy it. Haley's performance as Krueger is by far the best part of this remake. The other actors, while they didn't strike me as really bad, seemed boring inNo. The remake is not as good as the original movie. However, I did still enjoy it. Haley's performance as Krueger is by far the best part of this remake. The other actors, while they didn't strike me as really bad, seemed boring in comparison to the original. The most notable being Nancy, who in the original was strong and very well-developed, where as here she is kind of boring and not really the main focus until 30-40 minutes into the movie. A lot of the classic scenes are re-imagined here, but almost all of them lack the appeal that they had in the original. One thing that does need to be mentioned is the ridiculous amount of jump scares. There are over 30 jump scares in a 90 minute movie. Where as some of them are well done, it feels stale after the first few times. Overall, if you really like Freddy and you want to see him in action, check this movie out. Otherwise, stick with the original.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
JacobparkerMay 18, 2013
Was it scary? NO
Was it entertaining? -NO
I'll never watch this again, that was very boring ant definitley non exciting.
Watch the original it's much better!
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
0
gmpawesomenessFeb 6, 2013
This movie disgusted me for a number of reasons. The biggest being that Robert Englund would not playing his legendary character Freddy Krueger. Robert Englund owns that role to not have him play Freddy is like not having Harrison Ford playThis movie disgusted me for a number of reasons. The biggest being that Robert Englund would not playing his legendary character Freddy Krueger. Robert Englund owns that role to not have him play Freddy is like not having Harrison Ford play indiana jones or to hang the mexican flag in front of the white house. But Robert says he wanted to retire and you know what I could get over that if they didnt completely change his character. I hate it when people take some one eles great work of art and try to change it. YOU DONT SEE ME PAINTING OVER THE MONA LISA! There was no puns, no miniacal laugh no cheese yet still funny puns and they tried to make you feel sorry for freddy rather than being scared of him. Please if you love the nightmare on elm street movies do not buy or rent this movie because it would just premote them to make another terrible sequel. I hope that one day there wil;l be some one who can play the character as well as Robert Englund and I also hope If Wes Craven wont write the script then the next person who writes it will show some respect to the legeng that is Freddy Krueger.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
Rox22Jan 4, 2013
Personally, I think this movie gets far too much negativity than it deserves. Is it better than the original? No. But how can it be. The original has now been put on such a high pedestal that everyone has forgotten all of its flaws. ThisPersonally, I think this movie gets far too much negativity than it deserves. Is it better than the original? No. But how can it be. The original has now been put on such a high pedestal that everyone has forgotten all of its flaws. This movie is cursed with having to fill extremely large shoes that I doubt anyone could fill. Jackie Earle Haley is no where near as good as Robert Englund, but doesn't do a bad job either, Englund did have 7 movies to get it right after all. Overall: I think this is a great film and I really hope they continue with the series, I just hope that they listen to the fans a bit more for the next film.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
2
RolentoNov 25, 2012
I'm speechless. I'm not even a hardcore fan of the series, and I still felt bad for those fans after watching this at my local cinema. Without exaggeration, this is the worst movie I have ever seen to the point that it's not even decentI'm speechless. I'm not even a hardcore fan of the series, and I still felt bad for those fans after watching this at my local cinema. Without exaggeration, this is the worst movie I have ever seen to the point that it's not even decent joking material. It exploited the name of an actually good franchise and spoiled it of everything that was characteristic of it, replacing it with unoriginality itself, literally random jump scares (that scene with Freddy's head on a black background at a certain point... I cannot even begin to address how inappropriate that was) and turning a cult character into an obvious "mainstream" pedophile villain for no reason. What were they thinking.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
cameronmorewoodNov 7, 2012
Despite its bold recreation of the legendary movie monster and the spellbinding dream world created with the aid of modern technology, Nightmare is produced by Michael Bay, that is, it's flat and lifeless.
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
2
Kyle39Sep 9, 2012
Dreadful remake of Wes Craven's 1984 horror masterpiece. No redeeming value at all. Englund is sorely missing as Krueger, and the rest of the cast are untalented and bland. Just horrible on every level.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
vini1904Aug 19, 2012
With good scares, this film manages to get a night's sleep for the audience. But it also is not an exception to the rules that will be forever hated remakes. In my opinion this is one of those rare remakes that can be really good. You neverWith good scares, this film manages to get a night's sleep for the audience. But it also is not an exception to the rules that will be forever hated remakes. In my opinion this is one of those rare remakes that can be really good. You never know if you're dreaming or not.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
4
Mad_Hatter91Aug 12, 2012
The remake of Nightmare was not impressed me that much. Meanwhile, they put too many unexpected scenes that may frighten the beginning, but eventually you get used to the public. The worst thing is that this film seems to be made to do soThe remake of Nightmare was not impressed me that much. Meanwhile, they put too many unexpected scenes that may frighten the beginning, but eventually you get used to the public. The worst thing is that this film seems to be made to do so because there is nothing new in the entire film. Although the film has its good points such as the picture very dark and I must say that even the actors fared well, especially Rooney Mara. As for Freddy's makeup should I say, at least for me, has done quite well since they have tried to make it more realistic. Perhaps he had many chances to be a good remake, but have been wasted. Certainly the biggest mistake was putting a director who first made ​​advertising films and who have given a too big for him.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
GagaForGhibliJun 6, 2012
Overall A Decent Remake!
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
Horrormovieguy2Jun 3, 2012
The movie is ok,The thing i hated about the movie Freddy is not like the 1984 Freddy.Robert Englund put jokes while killing his victims and had fun with it,while, Jaikie is just boreing
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
5
HorrorCoffeeApr 7, 2012
Now in these days there are only remakes of the original (GOOD) horror movies. I think there was little too many Nightmare on Elm streets but still I did like most of them. Still I think they shouldn't make
Nightmare on Elm street 2 remake.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
spadenxJan 10, 2012
I liked how Freddy actually had a backstory in this and it explained a lot about his character and why he does the things that he does. I love Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy, even if he isnt England (the original Freddy) he is a good actor andI liked how Freddy actually had a backstory in this and it explained a lot about his character and why he does the things that he does. I love Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy, even if he isnt England (the original Freddy) he is a good actor and worth of the part. The rest of the actors were good as well. There are also a few original parts in there that actually work rather well and I enjoyed them.

The bad parts of the film - The kills were exactly like the original film and like the ending of Freddy vs Jason. I hated that, I wanted original kills that were worthy of Freddy's style, Not some poorly done "reimagining" of the original film's kills. Also the actresses in this film were terrible and ruin the film quite a bit, Rooney Mara was a terrible lead (and actress imo) who killed this film.

I am a long time fan of the Nightmare on Elm Street series and in my opinion, This is one of the best films the franchise has come out with. I liked it enough where I would give the sequel a chance but I wont see it unless they cast a new female lead.… Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
4
solutions10Dec 26, 2011
It's great they finally put Freddy into his original role (a child molester, which Wes Craven was barred from using in the originals, changing him to a child murderer to avoid controversy), and it's nice that they give him some extra pretext.It's great they finally put Freddy into his original role (a child molester, which Wes Craven was barred from using in the originals, changing him to a child murderer to avoid controversy), and it's nice that they give him some extra pretext. But it just doesn't work that his character is simply removed from this film in favor of a generic slasher villain. As has been stated, Freddy's appeal was largely his creativity in messing with his victims before murdering them in a very sadistic way. That's absent from this version. This Freddy has almost no sense of humor, and shows very little of the psychological torture Freddy Krueger is known for. The characters are certainly nothing special and are just generic teenagers, the kills are pretty weak and mostly come down to Freddy taunting them until he eventually simply stabs them, and it just doesn't work like the first ones did. It's not absolutely horrible and might be worth a watch if you've got nothing else, but it's definitely not the Freddy we've enjoyed watching up to now. The new character they put in his place is boring and almost totally humorless, completely lacking creativity. Fans of the originals probably won't like this. Fans of slashers with no background of Nightmare on Elm Street (which is sort of a contradiction) might enjoy it, but the rest of us will be wishing we were getting something more the whole time than a generic, humorless slasher flick like any other.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
HalfwelshmanDec 13, 2011
The remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street isn't a bad film because of complete lack of competence. On the contrary, on a technical level, the stunts and effects are handled extremely well. What makes it a particularly sub-par film is the factThe remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street isn't a bad film because of complete lack of competence. On the contrary, on a technical level, the stunts and effects are handled extremely well. What makes it a particularly sub-par film is the fact that it's so empty below the surface. Whereas the original was a thinking man's horror film, this version substitutes original ideas and genuinely scary imagery for cheap thrills and an abundance of gore. As a remake, it has little new to offer - every scene that "pays tribute" to the original is a pale shadow in comparison, and the few original ideas are lazy and completely lacking in the ability to scare. Though Jackie Earle Haley makes a decent enough Freddie Krueger, somehow the character loses all power and sense of threat with the filmmakers' decision to flesh out his backstory - he was scary in the original because he was an enigma! The vast majority of the cast are laughable in their performances (though at least Rooney Mara looks like she's trying) and the script is abysmal. Even after all this, the main crime this remake commits is not that it isn't fit to lick the boots of Wes Craven's chilling classic, it's that it simply isn't scary. It's unsubtle, dumb, and about as terrifying as a trip to your local post office. Thank goodness Wes Craven had nothing to do with this insulting version of his seminal horror creation, but at least he can still dream of the good old days, when original ideas still counted for something in filmmaking.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
asylumspadezNov 26, 2011
A solid remake however its far too much like the original and features little originality to it. I think the actresses sucked rather hard in this film while the actors were good. Jackie Earle Haley was great as the new Freddy yet I dont thinkA solid remake however its far too much like the original and features little originality to it. I think the actresses sucked rather hard in this film while the actors were good. Jackie Earle Haley was great as the new Freddy yet I dont think the script did his character any justice.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
1
LordNasebySep 27, 2011
Acting: Weak. Very weak. Like Sidney says in Scream "these movies are all just some big breasted chick who goes up the stairs when they should be going out the front door" I'm not saying that happens here, because obviously Freddy kills youActing: Weak. Very weak. Like Sidney says in Scream "these movies are all just some big breasted chick who goes up the stairs when they should be going out the front door" I'm not saying that happens here, because obviously Freddy kills you in your dreams and you can't really stop that, but the characters have the same I.Q. level. The characters in this one are all the same: one dimensional one emotion cardboard knife fodder. It sucks. Also Freddy, what is with Freddy? We all know that no one can beat Robert Englund as Freddy but COME ON! You have to try harder than that. He also goes directly into the 'pun kill' phase. why? why!? 1/10

Plot: The same as the original just with a few changes some of them are major I will admit. One thing I absolutely hated with this film was that they had every major kill scene and scare scene, they were ALL done better with the original and they had all of them EXCEPT THE BEST ONE!!! The epitome of cool Freddy kill is not involved with this one at all. Why the heck not!?! you have all the others why not that one!? Yeesh. Ridiculous. I hated it. Retards. But frankly, they had the plot so that you didn't give a rats about any of the characters. and the changes they made were incredibly stupid. I hated them. 1/10

Screenplay: Like I said earlier: Freddy goes directly into the 'pun kill' stage. Why? Also, no one says anything good. It was all cringe worthy. I absolutely hated it. I absolutely don't even see the point of any character saying anything simply because no one is going to the movie to hear great dialogue. They are coming to see Freddy butcher retard teenagers. So teens in this movie, don't open your mouth the audience will just flinch and groan if you do. 0/10

Likableness: I didn't like it. at all. I don't want this one to exist. I feel that they missed the mark on Freddy which is the worst mistake anyone could make and they had every major kill form the original except the best one. Why is that? If you've run out of characters by the point where it has to come up, add another one. no one can tell the difference. No one really cares. There were some good kills but they weren't as good as the original ones at all. I don't even see the point. .5/10

Final Score: 2.5/40 6% (S)


TRIVIA TIME: 1. two lines are taken out of past Freddy movies that I could spot. 1. "How's this for a wet dream?" from A Nightmare on Elm street 4: The Dream Master. and "I'm your boyfriend now" From the original Nightmare on Elm Street.

2. Originally intended to be a prequel, but the idea was dropped.

3. Billy Bob Thornton was considered to play Freddy Krueger.

4. Around 15 different drafts of the script were written. The final film is a hybrid of 4 of them.

5. Jackie Earle Haley would often improvise his lines on the set, feeling this might help unease his other cast members if they didn't know what line he was going to say.

6. Wes Craven was reportedly not approached about this remake. He has however publicly spoken against it. Good choice Wes.

7. To provoke a response from the actors in the scene in "Freddy's Cave", the photographs they found were Polaroids of little girls mixed with real Polaroids taken from medical surgeries.

8. Jackie Earle Haley scratched his corneas with the contact lenses he wore delaying production for a short time. He also had the whites of his eyes turn blood red for two weeks because of this.

9. Johnny Depp accompanied his friend Jackie Earle Haley to auditions for A Nightmare on Elm Street. Instead of Haley being chosen for a role, it was Depp who was spotted by director Wes Craven, who asked him if he would like to read for a part. Depp got a part in that film, Haley didn't, but Haley would go on to play Freddy in this remake 26 years later.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
grandpajoe6191Sep 25, 2011
A remake horror movie that's worst than "Friday the 13th" (Remake version). It sure did give me 'nightmares'.
6 of 7 users found this helpful61
All this user's reviews
4
TheNewSpielbergSep 24, 2011
Just saw this movie today. As a standalone horror film, its really not bad. But as a remake of one of the best known classics of all time, it unfortunately falls flat on its face. Jackie Earl Haley as the new Freddy Krueger is pretty good,Just saw this movie today. As a standalone horror film, its really not bad. But as a remake of one of the best known classics of all time, it unfortunately falls flat on its face. Jackie Earl Haley as the new Freddy Krueger is pretty good, and does a great voice to go with his performance but I still think Robert Englund will always be the better Freddy. The biggest complaint I have is that instead of using atmosphere and the terror of the unseen, the movie employs a cheap strategy of constantly resorting to jump scares, which become less and less effective as the film goes on. The acting is terrible, but what do you expect from a teen horror remake. All in all, while this is a decent attempt to revive the Nightmare series, I still think that it should be simply left alone. Worth checking out if you're interested.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
driesy8888Sep 5, 2011
Garbage. Utter garbage. Oh how the original sh*ts ALL over this movie. The only mildly appealing thing is the cinematography at some points...otherwise, throw this one out
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
SlasherVoorheesAug 20, 2011
I Have Seen some of the new Horror Remakes and this is one of The Worst i mean Freddy's Makeup is ok but the Kill Scenes Are Generic and The Acting is Horrible the Guy Who Plays Freddy is Aboslutly Horrible and doesnt fit the Role Well at allI Have Seen some of the new Horror Remakes and this is one of The Worst i mean Freddy's Makeup is ok but the Kill Scenes Are Generic and The Acting is Horrible the Guy Who Plays Freddy is Aboslutly Horrible and doesnt fit the Role Well at all This is a Remake that Features new Versions Of Classic Scenes but Its Not the Same and its redone Poorly. The Characters are Lame and Boring and And Worst of all Freddy Has no Peronality and all he is is just A Poor Mans Copy of the Original Freddy This is a Remake that You Should Stay Far Away from!… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
Ivan1017Aug 5, 2011
I don't know why this movie gets a lot of negativity. There was nothing wrong with it except that there were a lot of jump scare scenes. The acting was actually good but I prefer the one playing Kris to be Nancy. The humour was better thanI don't know why this movie gets a lot of negativity. There was nothing wrong with it except that there were a lot of jump scare scenes. The acting was actually good but I prefer the one playing Kris to be Nancy. The humour was better than the original with those epic one liners like Jesse: Oh my God! Freddy: No just me. The visuals were impressive which I expect because Michael Bay is involved in this one. The origin of Freddy was very well explained too. Don't listen to the critics and those who say that this lacks humour or it's way too serious because you know your watching a horror not a comedy right.… Expand
5 of 8 users found this helpful53
All this user's reviews
5
rotkuJun 24, 2011
Disappointing effort at a remake that while trying to take the movie into the modern era, loses all the charm and originality that the original movie had. Plus there is no replacing Robert Englund as Freddie Kruger.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
jimmytancrediMay 29, 2011
Freddy wasn't ever to scary that much, with exception of the first one, second and the seventh. So why people claim about this remake? The remake brought the original Freddy back, and yes it's a cliche movie but very good produced. This movieFreddy wasn't ever to scary that much, with exception of the first one, second and the seventh. So why people claim about this remake? The remake brought the original Freddy back, and yes it's a cliche movie but very good produced. This movie is far away to be perfect as the others, but i love the sarcastic Freddy, anyway this film was so criticized cuz is a remake. I waited so long to see this movie. The summary was right: they did re-imagine Freddy Krueger. I can see a big difference between Robert and Jackie as Freddy. Even though this was copying a ground-breaking movie and it excited me, there may have been problems. I understand that as a series goes on, things get boring and repetitive. Because this is a reboot, I found the new storyline a little complex at first. In both the original and the reboot, Freddy was bad from the start. Like the other slasher movies I've seen, I was disappointed that all the other supporting characters died. With today's technology for movies, everything looks more realistic. Much detail was put into Freddy's disfigured face. and beaten sweater. As for personality, Jackie made Freddy demonic. What didn't go away though, is Freddy's sense of amusement. I wouldn't say i liked for the gore. When I watched it alone, the suspense got me going. I knew my heart accelerated, thinking at any moment, he'll pop up. The very end told me Freddy was still out there, possibly in other forms. But I forced a laugh seeing him defeated. Every bit was just startling. For this movie, I liked how the suspense pumped me with adrenaline, making me feel alive, the make-up and detail, and the cast. I disliked the blood splattering and how the attacks can be torturing. The new Freddy Krueger is my kind of villain even though I'm not willing to own a copy. If you hate this Freddy, that's your problem.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
9
jordyboyMay 3, 2011
This was the best remake ever wow it was great what r u people talking about i mean it was great sure its no robert englund performance but jackie did decent the rest of the cast did great
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
6
MoviebuffreviewApr 21, 2011
With a great Freddie, a better than average horror script, and some good effects, A Nightmare on Elm Street is not a bad horror remake. Unfortunately, the tiring system, aka jump scares, some bad supporting cast and a predictable ending doWith a great Freddie, a better than average horror script, and some good effects, A Nightmare on Elm Street is not a bad horror remake. Unfortunately, the tiring system, aka jump scares, some bad supporting cast and a predictable ending do hurt it from being the next Nightmare for you when you go to bed.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
9
TitusPrimeFeb 8, 2011
I am actually very surprised by the mainstream critique of this film. Especially from the critic that also gave it its highest score. His single 3 word statement tells me he didnt watch it, or really wasn't in the mood and shouldnt haveI am actually very surprised by the mainstream critique of this film. Especially from the critic that also gave it its highest score. His single 3 word statement tells me he didnt watch it, or really wasn't in the mood and shouldnt have watched it. I grew up during the Jason and Freddie era. I was terrified as a child and amused as a teenager. The first movie I ever went to at night without my parents and instead with my friends was Friday the 13th part 3 in 3-d. So I believe I understand the attachment and fondness our generation has for these films very well. With that said I thought that Jackie Earle Haley brought depth to Freddie that was hair raising. It gave me the shivers and I was scared all over again. So dont believe the critics just because they gave an opinion. Take my advice and be confident that you wont be wasting your time with this film. Then form your own opinion. :)… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
0
GooberParentsFeb 7, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I have to say this movie was by far one of the worst remakes I've ever has the displeasure of seeing. I love how they robbed scenes from the originals (bloody body in a bag in the school hallway, Nancy's name and mother's fate, the blond bombshell/bad boy cuddling then she dies all around the room and him in jail) I thought to was supposed to be a remake, not a 'hijack-and-puke' fest. I love the breaking of the paper cutter just like in the Faculty too! If there is ANYTHING "good" about this movie, it gave us plenty of not-fully-related-to-the-plot images at why pedophiles should be burned alive.… Expand
3 of 4 users found this helpful31
All this user's reviews
0
SpykeFeb 7, 2011
I new this would flop the moment I heard Michael Bay and Platinum Dunes were making it and all I can say is:

Try not to fall asleep as it is truly that bad!
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
JonnyFendiJan 10, 2011
There were four legendary slash icons in 80s (as I remembered): Jason Voorhees (Friday The 13th), Michael Myers (Halloween), Chucky (Child Play) and the deathly-claws Freddy Krueger. On glimpse of the trailer, I expected thiz new rebootThere were four legendary slash icons in 80s (as I remembered): Jason Voorhees (Friday The 13th), Michael Myers (Halloween), Chucky (Child Play) and the deathly-claws Freddy Krueger. On glimpse of the trailer, I expected thiz new reboot feature will be revealing the history and origin of mysterious Freddy figure. Far from the expectation, thiz flick totally becoming the nightmare itself. If you have ever seen previous Freddy movies then you really can skip thiz one. Thiz is ninth movie that bring Freddy back to his series-killing (1984-2003), since Johnny Depp first appearance. The movie is directing debut by Samuel Bayer who best known as Music Video Director. Robert Englund who played as Freddy back to back on previous movies, now replaced by Jackie Earle Haley. Haley seems to be suitable choice to fill thiz character. Although on the physical appearance, Englund is taller than him. Other Casts are: Rooney Mara, Thomas Dekker, Katie Cassidy, etc. The storyline on thiz newest version was terrible. There was no creativity to bring something fresh. Everything was rip-off from previous movies. It is always about a group of teens slashed one by one until the end. Freddy figure himself did not reveal something new here (Spoiler Alert!), as we knew he was child molester who burned alive as his punishment. There is well known element from thiz franchise, the victims knew they could not fall asleep but in the end they always did not realize already in Freddy nightmare. Thiz scene which I talked about it was repeatedly told over and over again (although with various conditions). It is very exhausting to spend your time for these monotone events. You could probably fall asleep even before thiz nightmare starts yet. Visit My Blog on JONNY'S MOVEE : http://jonnyfendi.blogspot.com… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
DalekNov 27, 2010
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Meh, disapointment. Atmosphere is great, but the actors SUCK. Nancy is an emo 95% of the time, and she is boring and depressing. Oh, and guess what Freddy lives in now? Nope, not a house. A nursery... I mean!? Why? It's not really spooky and the house was so much better.

****SPOILERS****
The ending, was an epic fail. They just bring Freddy out of the dream and kill him in less than a minute, it sucked. Then Nancy's mother gets killed at her home whilst he is in the mirror. Then credits roll...

Apart from that, I didn't like it that much. I was expecting more.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
4
Film_Fanatic_15Nov 22, 2010
Wow Samuel Bayer, stick to music videos. Horror isn't your genre. Now let me move down the short list of what went wrong in this film. First off, what was up with Freddy's costume and make-up? Once he appeared, we did jolt, but he wasn'tWow Samuel Bayer, stick to music videos. Horror isn't your genre. Now let me move down the short list of what went wrong in this film. First off, what was up with Freddy's costume and make-up? Once he appeared, we did jolt, but he wasn't intimidating. He was just kind of there. Secondly, the storyline. Complete Train wreck! It was predictable at times. And instead of horror, there were countless attempts to develop a deep relationship between the two main characters, but was quickly interrupted by a couple glances of Freddy, and that was interrupted by indirect humor. This constant cycle of romance, Freddy, humor, romance, Freddy....and so forth, got annoying. Corny dialogue and the most typical thematic elements that is viewed puts A Nightmare on Elm Street as just another slasher film remake that didn't make the "cut".… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
10
TehIrishSoapNov 9, 2010
Oscar Worthy. The way Samuel Bayer pulls off the tension and brilliant interaction between the characters is astounding. Freddy Kruger belongs in the high elite club of film characters such as Atticus Finch, The Godfather, And General Patton.Oscar Worthy. The way Samuel Bayer pulls off the tension and brilliant interaction between the characters is astounding. Freddy Kruger belongs in the high elite club of film characters such as Atticus Finch, The Godfather, And General Patton. An absolutely incredible film, that has to be seen by everyone, young and old.… Expand
4 of 14 users found this helpful410
All this user's reviews
5
MetalMan95Oct 26, 2010
I liked the gore, I liked the dark atmosphere, Jackie Earle Haley was awesome as Freddy. But honestly, It wasnt that enjoyable. the kids acted the best when they died. Its ok, its not great, i didnt hate it, but it wasnt the greatest remake.I liked the gore, I liked the dark atmosphere, Jackie Earle Haley was awesome as Freddy. But honestly, It wasnt that enjoyable. the kids acted the best when they died. Its ok, its not great, i didnt hate it, but it wasnt the greatest remake. Its way better than th Friday the 13th remake, but it wasnt anywhere near The Crazies remake.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
1
jdrandall38Oct 25, 2010
This was the worst remake of a classic i have ever seen. The acting was terrible ( Besides the guy who played freddy which was pretty good). The original haunted my dreams as a kid and if kids watch this one, the only thing that will beThis was the worst remake of a classic i have ever seen. The acting was terrible ( Besides the guy who played freddy which was pretty good). The original haunted my dreams as a kid and if kids watch this one, the only thing that will be haunting their dreams is the horrid acting. I honestly expected it to at least own up to the original in some way but this movie doesn't deserve to be called "A Nightmare on Elm Street", maybe it should be called "A nightmare by New Line Cinema" I wish i could have that 90 minutes back to watch the original instead of this P.O.S!!!!… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
GarethCriticOct 22, 2010
This movie pales in comparison to the original and why? This remake ruins Freddie Kruger. In the original he was a killer who invaded people dreams to murder them and despite still doing that in this movie it just doesn't have the sameThis movie pales in comparison to the original and why? This remake ruins Freddie Kruger. In the original he was a killer who invaded people dreams to murder them and despite still doing that in this movie it just doesn't have the same effect. Freddie, in the original, had a sick sense of humor and was even able to turn his kills into entertainment via the ability to shape shift and do anything he wanted within his victims dreams but in this villain Freddie is simply a stereotypical slasher. This movie has ruined a once credible character.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
1
MovieLonely94Oct 16, 2010
why are the remakes of michael myers, jason voorhees, and freddy krueger so frickin stupid and boring?!?! they had nothing to do with the originals and they frickin know it! I swear to god, If I see another remake of another horror movie, I'mwhy are the remakes of michael myers, jason voorhees, and freddy krueger so frickin stupid and boring?!?! they had nothing to do with the originals and they frickin know it! I swear to god, If I see another remake of another horror movie, I'm gonna choke myself!… Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
8
mrcriticOct 9, 2010
It may have been sort of stupid with bad acting, but it definitely exceeded my expectations. Very funny, but the movie itself made me want to go to sleep. For my first Nightmare movie, I would give it a 4 out of 10.
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
4
vernOct 5, 2010
This movie was rather generic. There were a few cool sequences here and there, but those sequences are what a 'Nightmare' movie should be filled with: creative and ironic dreamscapes. This one only offered a few of them. Freddy was onlyThis movie was rather generic. There were a few cool sequences here and there, but those sequences are what a 'Nightmare' movie should be filled with: creative and ironic dreamscapes. This one only offered a few of them. Freddy was only semi-intimidating and changing his voice to a wierd growl was more of a distraction than scary. But in comparison, it was a better movie than Friday the 13th (2009) and Prom Night (2008), and about as good as Halloween (2007) which isn't saying much. I'd say don't even bother renting it, but if it's on tv (and it probably will be in a few months), then its worth checking out.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
8
Forrestgump1Sep 24, 2010
The Film a Nightmare on Elm Street is in no WAY perfect i kno what your thinking what the hell am i doing giving this movie what people are saying to be a complete waste of time, The Question i dont even no what i am giving this movie a 4.5The Film a Nightmare on Elm Street is in no WAY perfect i kno what your thinking what the hell am i doing giving this movie what people are saying to be a complete waste of time, The Question i dont even no what i am giving this movie a 4.5 maybe because it was a scary FUN time at the movies. But even tho this movie yes has its many flaws which are pretty much made up by the end of the film this movie maybe Confusing and you may get lost at times .. By the very scary witty outright genius performance that Haley gives as the Very Burned and Disturbed Fred Kruger a Gardner from an Old pre-school!. This movie is cliched and yes you know when the jumps are gonna be tumbling at you.. and when i jump like i did thats when you know this movie is allright!.

The movie starts out with the Twilight Hunk everyone at which is probably going to see this movie Kellan Lutz Who playes Dean i wish i could tell you more about this character but he is killed off within the first 5mins so i cant really tell you anything ... well he is in a Diner the Springwood Diner where he awakes to nothingness and is started to get a little curious he stumbles to the back in the kitchen to find the Clawed Freddy Kruger!.. But i think i will let you see the movie to let you find out how this happens.

At the funeral long time friend of Dean, Nancy played what is kind of like a young Emily Blunt played pretty good by (Rooney Mara) well after Deans death she is starting to see a strange man in her dreams who is burnt to a crisp basically to say hes name which you all no him buy FREDDY! why he is killing these teens one by one no one knows. But when the unsuspecting teens fall asleep they fall into a world at which they cant control.. and at this point your in Freddy's world! where your pretty much dead as soon as you fall asleep.

But as the original Freddy always dead Freddy loved to play with his victims minds before he kills him thats when we finally get a glimpse at this Finger-clawed FREDDY played i think as a very well choice Jackie Earl Haley!. You would maybe think he is not the best choice for Freddy Kruger but honestly if i had to pick someone i would Pick Jackie i mean he is so immersed into this burned Psychopath you really cant go wrong. Soon after another teen and another teen are knocked off the chopping Block!.

Freddy begins getting closer and closer to finding what he wants hes favorite little girl Nancy. But Freddy keeping them up all the time pretty soon you have to get tired am i corrected? Yes sooner or later they all fall asleep... After 70 hrs of non-sleep your body begins to break down and you experience these little things called Micro-Naps where pretty much your whole body is sleeping and you dont even know it thats when Freddy can get you at your most vulnerable point!.

This movie does have alot of scenes you know where the Music level rises about a third and you get this Huge BLAST! .. of sound waves in the theater well shockingly enough that worked for me i was genuinely surprise at the fact ... you pretty much know when one thing is gonna pop out and well that kind of takes away from the fun of going to a horror film but it WORKS! .. There really is no PLOT twist here except the fact is if you have seen the original you know what to expect.

Once again i am going to give credit to Jackie Earl Haley at giving one Hell of a performance here i was really immersed into this guy Fred Kruger the Flashback scenes actually when you dont that he is the way he is you kind of fell sad and lonely for this character but than you find out all the horrible stuff he did and you just feel like wow cant believe i felt sorry for this jerk.

Seeing this movie did bring back some memories of the very first one.. this movie in no way shape or form lives up to the horror classic that is Nightmare on Elm st. But i wish Wes Craven would have had more involvement in this film than he did .. but i guess hes busy planning Scream 4 which i cant wait for. But when all is said and done you are going to be glad you went and Saw a Nightmare on Elm Street! .. 1...2... Freddy's Coming for you! A-

ReviewdByNate

RunTime97mins

RatedR

Thanks For Stoppin Buy!… Expand
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
9
FLOPAD180Sep 8, 2010
okay all of you critics out there. Ive seen the original Nightmare on Elm Street and this new one. and i critic movies pretty hard, ask anyone i know. This was a good movie. and thoe whole time i was watching it, i was trying to find theokay all of you critics out there. Ive seen the original Nightmare on Elm Street and this new one. and i critic movies pretty hard, ask anyone i know. This was a good movie. and thoe whole time i was watching it, i was trying to find the flippin difference between this one and the old one. In the new one, there is better graphics, more pop out scenes, and more explanation of Freddy Kruger. In the old one, there is a cool scene where blood shoots out of Johnny Depp's bed, and maybe one more funny line. THEY ARE THE SAME MOVIE. and i know you can never beat the original, but this was a good movie.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
1
thelordoffilmAug 13, 2010
Why was this movie necessary I ask myself, to make money, to boast special effects? I don't really know because the movie never explains why. Is it for entertainment, no I don't think so. I know what exactly why it was made for. It was madeWhy was this movie necessary I ask myself, to make money, to boast special effects? I don't really know because the movie never explains why. Is it for entertainment, no I don't think so. I know what exactly why it was made for. It was made to dig in the pockets of fans of the series and give them a horrible product. I would know I was one of them yesterday and my wife and everybody else in the movies was. Wes Craven's original A Nightmare on Elm Street was a fresh idea. It was a new vision of horror back then. It had nightmarish visuals and gore, and one of the most charismatic horror icons ever Freddy Kruger. This remake is a perfect example of what made that original movie so much better. Let's compare scenes shall we. The famous scene where Freddy stretches the wall above Nancy's head and looks at her, the original is creepier due to its realistic effects. The remake has CGI and ruins a perfect scene where it's suppose to be tense and suspenseful it turns out that Freddy has his own line of wallpaper. Let's talk about the acting and casting choices now. The girl playing Nancy is Roony Mara a weird gothic chick who looks like she's going to throw up at every scene. Then we have Kris played by Katie Cassidy who the only thing she does is stare in the distance and "acts" (notice the quotations) dramatically. Then the boys who play every other high school kid out there are nothing really new and engaging. They say all the same thing it's not real it's just a dream yadda yadda. The original cast their appeal was that they look like everyday people kids next door their dialogue was realistic and their roles were written well so we can adapt to them. Jackie Earle Haley as Freddy, the only thing I say about that is we miss you Robert Englund where the hell are you? I do admit Haley tries to give his own style but he just falls short he so poorly written in this movie. The filmmakers said they wanted to remove all the comical stuff and make Freddy scarier. Are you trying to say Englund wasn't scary, watch Wes Craven's New Nightmare where Robert Englund goes serious and scares the crap out of you. You know what Freddy being comical is what made Freddy famous you always can tell he enjoyed what he did to people. It was black humor; this "serious" (more quotation marks) Freddy is as boring as a burnt pretzel. CGI, good looking actors, impressive cinematography does not make a good movie. Did Samuel Bayer saw the original movie did he send his actors to see it. I don't think so. This movie so bad that Wes Craven should re-release his original and basically say a statement this is how it's done people. I told five or six people not to go see it hopefully they listen to me I don't want them to see an incompetent, lazily directed film. It's just going to dig into their pockets.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Lopez17Aug 11, 2010
I am not a fan of the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" in fact I did not like it much at all mostly due to the fact that for a movie with it's reputation it lacked everything a great horror film needs it just fell flat when I needed itI am not a fan of the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" in fact I did not like it much at all mostly due to the fact that for a movie with it's reputation it lacked everything a great horror film needs it just fell flat when I needed it to soar. Sometime in mid to late '09, I started hearing rumors that New Line Cinema was looking to reboot the famed Nightmare on Elm Street franchise but then I had not seen the original so I had no interest in watching the remake. Well after much speculation and some minor hype for this film I sat down to see the much talked about remake to the popular 1984 slasher film. Little did I know that I was in for a treat and a sour disappointment? Samuel Bayer's (another music video director trying to make it big) "A Nightmare on Elm Street" was not the nightmare I had hoped for it lacked depth of character and enough twist and turns to really be called a true horror film instead it comes off as a two bit SyFy channel "horror" film. That comes complete with hooky dialogue, extremely poor acting, predictability on a scale so high that you almost want to laugh at this films expense and trust me when I say this, you will! The "Nightmare on Elm Street" remake makes the original and other horror remakes (The Ring, The Crazies) look so good in comparison. Samuel Bayer's â… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
JoseR.May 16, 2010
Generic deaths, overall tone, and trying to make freddy into an actual psychopath gave birth to this movie. After the other failure remakes known as the Texas Chainsaw massacre and Friday the 13th were slammed by critics, New line Cinema in Generic deaths, overall tone, and trying to make freddy into an actual psychopath gave birth to this movie. After the other failure remakes known as the Texas Chainsaw massacre and Friday the 13th were slammed by critics, New line Cinema in their infinite wisdom decided to trust Micheal Bay's Platinum Studios AGAIN. In my own Opinion I though Jackey Earl Haley's performance was great, it was samuel bayer and his studio that ruined the movie in general. This movie stopped the tradition of deaths in style, rather it tried to actually mold itself into a horror film, which it could never be. The original was meant to cash in on the slasher genre in the 80's. It had a low budget and was expected to fail. Why is that formula so hard to follow New Line Cinema. I want funny and creepy. Not generic murderer.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
WilliamR.May 5, 2010
By the book remake that doesn't do anything better or more scary than the originals. In fact the acting was terrible and the kids had no life at all. I saw it to see the new Freddy and now I wish i hadn't wasted the money...Robert By the book remake that doesn't do anything better or more scary than the originals. In fact the acting was terrible and the kids had no life at all. I saw it to see the new Freddy and now I wish i hadn't wasted the money...Robert Englund is irreplaceable.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
AlecBMay 5, 2010
John E you just need to die b/c your a fag. Anyways movie was good not great but good enough. Critics idk whats up your asses, i havnt been able to take you guys seriously ever since No Country for old men was rated a 91. ( worst movie John E you just need to die b/c your a fag. Anyways movie was good not great but good enough. Critics idk whats up your asses, i havnt been able to take you guys seriously ever since No Country for old men was rated a 91. ( worst movie ever). But ya great to go see ALOT better then Friday the 13th or Transformers 2.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
AaronMMay 5, 2010
Don't go see in theatres and don't even bother to rent this one. There is nothing refreshing about this new Nightmare on Elm Street. Creators need to realize the joy of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies is the nightmares Don't go see in theatres and don't even bother to rent this one. There is nothing refreshing about this new Nightmare on Elm Street. Creators need to realize the joy of the Nightmare on Elm Street movies is the nightmares themselves and the characters own beliefs that they can defeat Freddy at his own game. Instead, this movie goes the "I have amnesia" route and tries to set up Nightmare on Elm Street as a mystery that everyone already knows the answers to! What a waste! And Jackie Earle Haley plays Freddy the same way throughout the entire movie - very disappointing - and the movie just seems distant. Distant to its audience, distant to its fans, and even fans with amnesia are left with nothing to appreciate with this remake.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
JustinTMay 5, 2010
If a deranged killer is haunting your dreams, do not watch this movie. It will put you to sleep. Like most other horor remakes, ANOES takes out what was charming about the first film and replaces it with loud noises intended to startle If a deranged killer is haunting your dreams, do not watch this movie. It will put you to sleep. Like most other horor remakes, ANOES takes out what was charming about the first film and replaces it with loud noises intended to startle instead of scare. Plus, Kruger was always interesting because he had the ability to shape-shift into... well... pretty much anything: a television set, a snake, friends of the victim etc. This time around, he just chases his victims (all of which are plagued with terrible acting skills) and kills them which is reminiscent of countless other horror movie icons. Freddy may not be dead, but to me he is.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
TimothyDMay 5, 2010
The first thing I say is always see something for yourself, I might not like it but you might. In today's horror movie world, this will most likely please young people and teenagers equally since remakes are aimed at them but I agree The first thing I say is always see something for yourself, I might not like it but you might. In today's horror movie world, this will most likely please young people and teenagers equally since remakes are aimed at them but I agree with a lot of people downing this. The new guy gives a mildly decent performance as a reinvented Fred, the bad news is the new take leaves your skin crawling instead of laughing and fearing the guy simutaneously. This isn't good because the back story makes you feel bad for the man's disturbia, you're not sure what he is and what he did and that makes it awkward and weird. I found myself wanting to walk away from the movie because I wasn't sure what I was watching. Secondly, the dream sequences are boring as sin. I was waiting for those creative scenes where you really are on the edge of your seat wondering what was about to happen and instead I just wondered how long before the kid would be killed. That brings me to the kids, the guy in the beginning seemed promising as a potential leading role since we don't often see the male survival rate in hack and slash then you're led to believe the blonde is our female heroine. So much random time was spent on her that when they got to the real one, well, I was confused again. Not to mention we learn nothing interesting about her aside from the obvious connection she makes. Then our real female heroine doesn't really have much of a personality,while she's an average girl which is good to see I found myself wanting her blonde friend back instead. Overall on the teen playing cast, their deaths and quick stories that add nothing do not allow you to empathize with them. Characters in the past Elm Street movies actually made you wish they didn't die because they were interesting even in those few seconds they had on screen. I leave it with three stars because the new guy does make your skin crawl, and confused about how you're supposed to view him. I'll even admit I kept comparing him to old Fred, and just couldn't see him as our favorite villain. Though a child killer is no better, it somehow just lessens the squick factor. Anyway, It really could have been better done, they could have taken some pointers from the old school instead of leaving it so unimaginative. And that's all I have to say about that.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
KyleSMay 4, 2010
The creators did not watch the original. Why is the story changed?? The loud noise scare tactic is getting faking annoying also. Half the movie wasn't on Elm Street. They should change the title to "A Nightmare in the next township over The creators did not watch the original. Why is the story changed?? The loud noise scare tactic is getting faking annoying also. Half the movie wasn't on Elm Street. They should change the title to "A Nightmare in the next township over nowhere Near Elm Street Because it is all about the Preschool"... Too much??… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
EdCMay 4, 2010
Definitely don't listen to the critics on this one. Awesome remake. Far and away better than the remakes of horror movies not to mention way better than the source material. A must see for horror fans.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
8
SamPMay 4, 2010
Thought this was a good remake. Not the best horror remake I have seen in awhile, but a good one. Weak spots I thought was a less than stellar script and the lead actress. While watching it I thought the actress playing Kris could have Thought this was a good remake. Not the best horror remake I have seen in awhile, but a good one. Weak spots I thought was a less than stellar script and the lead actress. While watching it I thought the actress playing Kris could have played a better nancy. Mara was just too blah for me, not the looks cause she is good looking, but the acting. Haley was the man in this movie. Making Freddy more realistic and less killer clown. Solid remake, not as bad as I have read.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
10
BrianR.May 4, 2010
All i can truly say is that i loved this remake! I was suprised by this movie in fact that i would tell people that they should see this. I loved it!
0 of 1 users found this helpful
10
JoshAMay 4, 2010
Great movie. Much, much better than Friday The 13th's remake. Jackie Earl Haley is amazing as Freddy!
0 of 1 users found this helpful
9
JacobSMay 4, 2010
What a remake should look like. It was creepy, the actor's were more than competent, and Jackie Earle Haley was absolutely fantastic. I don't understand the low ratings. The only con to this movie was that it had a bit too many What a remake should look like. It was creepy, the actor's were more than competent, and Jackie Earle Haley was absolutely fantastic. I don't understand the low ratings. The only con to this movie was that it had a bit too many jump scares. Other than that, a great movie.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
ChrisGMay 4, 2010
I am a fan of the series. I had high hopes that this would reinvigorate the franchise and give a new generation a Freddy to be scared of. Boy was I wrong, jackie jo whatever his name is just used his Rorschach voice from watchmen and his I am a fan of the series. I had high hopes that this would reinvigorate the franchise and give a new generation a Freddy to be scared of. Boy was I wrong, jackie jo whatever his name is just used his Rorschach voice from watchmen and his make up effects left him looking more like voldemort than Freddy. The film as a whole seemed thrown together and rushed to production with little care for character development or good directing. Wes Cravens was the better version, when compared to this half hearted attempt to recapture the horror of dreams and a man with a claw.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
prev
Page:
More From This Movie

35 Critic Reviews

5.0 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL