The title is very honest about this snoozefest. The textbook definition of an unnecessary remake filled with cardboard characters, videoclip aesthetic and hilariously bad dialogues.

With a very good course and be faithful to the original, failed to overcome the classic 1984. A movie very modern and trendy, but leaving many questions unanswered. Questions answered only to the original.

Copy and paste.

Another average remake of an 80īs classic flick, thatīs far away from being descent. The whole cast (except Haley) is petty, the thrilling scenes were cut so short and fast that you never jump out of your seats and the cgi-effects (above all the final scene) are really bad. So is there any reason to give this a try? Maybe, because some shots (the school and the factory for example) are kind of dark and suspense andHaley is not the worst Englund replacement.

Dull and disposable.

Sweet jesus this was awful. There are literally no positives to list here, it's all terrible. The acting, the pacing, the visuals, even the deaths are uninspired and boring! Easily the crowning fault of the film is Freddy himself. Sorry Jackie Earle Haley, stick to being Rorschach.

How many times does that Quentin kid need to be stabbed before he finally dies?

45.000

Even by the low standards of Platinum Dune, this is terrible - sleepwalking its way through randomly chosen scenes from the original, with absolutely no interest in its source material or ability to scare anyone older than 10. Though Haley was an inspired replacement as Krueger, the most menacing thing he gets to do, is making sparks with the knife-glove, while looking like a melted Barbie-doll.

If you die in your dreams do you die fo real?? These are the kind of important questions you'll be asking yourself while watching this shit movie. In one scene a convulsing girl levitates and flies around the room in a ragdoll-like manner until she floats over her bed, flips around, gets cut up by invisible knives, and bleeds out everywhere. But instead of laughing the entire time like any normal adult would I was bored to tears. Movie sucks.

Freddy Krueger is a famous face in the genre of horror. His name is one of the most recognizable names in all of film history. Yet the horror genre is often full of cliches and people claim they will not watch a new horror with the same old characters and yet here we stand with the possibility of a new nightmare franchise in the works. And we arent rolling our eyes with disgust we are embracing this new series. I cannot tell anyone why that is but people are happy about this "re-envisioning"

Remakes are fine, but this remake felt wrong. Even the great quality felt wrong, which is something I have never complained about. It felt incredibly generic and like a Twilight-esque Elm Street. [Full Review]

I know it is weird, but I haven't seen the original so I really don't know how groundbreaking it was. I know the character Freddy as a cult icon and even with my meager knowledge of him I'm disappointed with his portrayal (and CGIs in 2010 at that too). And if in a horror movie you try to create tension at a document signing scene, you are doomed.

Besides Rooney Mara good acting that pretty much carried the whole movie this movie was nothing close to how great the original and was Robert Englund is the only Freddy.

Surprisingly not terrible. It's almost halfway decent. Jackie Earle Haley brings a lot of darkness to the role. Some of the production design and cinematography are memorable and the editing during the pharmacy is fan-fucking-tastic. The pacing also seems to improve as the story progresses, rather than deteriorate. That being said, character development and attachment is practically non-existent, the dialogue was cheesy, and having Freddy crazily appear behind the victim got old really fast.

a waste of breath..

a good remake, the cgi looked pretty bad but Jackie Earle Haley played a good Freddy and i would see it again

Taken by itself, the film's okay. Decent visuals, not too gorey, like most horror films you see these days. But not scary either. And not ridiculous enough to be funny. As a remake, it completely ruined the original story. Bad dialogue, no building up the tension, missed the whole point of the dream sequences; feels like they've sewn a bunch of scenes together in a hurry. It didn't work.

Visually faithful but lacking the depth and subversive twists that made the original so memorable, the Nightmare on Elm Street remake lives up to its title in the worst possible way.

I can't find anything positive to say about this at all. Clearly, this was made solely to cash in on the Elm Street franchise recognition. This doesn't improve on the original in any area, the acting is pathetic, and there isn't a single character that the movie develops well enough to make the viewer care about them.

One of the worst remakes/retellings of any of the good film franchises that have been coming out lately.

Slick photography, JEH was alright, but there's lots of redundant dialogue and it lacks anything as spectacular and surreal as Johnny Depp getting eaten by his bed in the original. I saw a bigass meteor on the way home from the theater, that was pretty cool.

"In a way, Freddy finally makes sense in this version of Elm Street, but Robert Englund's original Freddy is still preferable to Haley's pervy Groundskeeper Willy." - Ed Gonzalez

Piece of shit. No redeeming characteristics, and far worse than being stupid, it commits the cardinal sin of being boring. Also, when did the council of movie elders get together and vote that B-grade slasher flicks would no longer include female nudity?

Liveless and sleepy tryout to wake up old horror menace. Effects could be nice, but unfortunately they are only rerun from older Nightmare films. The swap of actor for Freddy Krueger succeeded better than I expected. Extra points for that.