Perry Kate Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

willnye-74430 I hate this movie, this is a good idea that wound up being horribly executed. Having Jackie Earle Haley play Freddy Krueger was a great idea but in this movie he wasn't trying in the slightest literally if you look at his face while Freddy is on camera he's just kind of staring off into space without even showing emotion at all. They changed Freddy's backstory so that he was a pedophile who worked and slept in the basement of a kindergarten, Only one of the characters had the same name as Nancy but she had a different last name. They recycled a couple of jokes but none of them were as good as when Robert Englund did them, the CGI in this movie made the special effects in the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" look state of the art by comparison, but the absolute worst thing about this movie is that the only horror in this movie is a bunch of jumpscares and it's so obvious when they're about to happen that they won't even startle you

undeaddt If horror cult movies keep going this way they will surely ruin their legacy. At some points, this movie is funny how bad it is and when that happens to a horror movie, you know it can't be any worse. The acting was okay for my standards, the CGI was okay also, but man, did Freddy look bad. His face was so badly made, it didn't even look like him. And of course, the script was afwul, the way the movie progressed was toxic and that made everything look worse that it actually is.

redninjaboy Tell me something. What was so great about the originals? Is it the acting? No. The acting is terrible. The effects? Maybe. I'm sure they were awesome for their time. Robert Englund? Again, maybe. He really seemed to be into his part. Johnny Depp? ...No. The fact that Freddy kills a total of three people? One of which was barely on screen? No. That sucks.Ok, maybe I'm being a bit harsh. The effects even today aren't that bad. And the two kills that weren't painstakingly slow and boring were actually pretty awesome. And Johnny Depp's death was iconic. But I was never a fan of the original movies. The acting always made me cringe, the sound effects were goofy, and Freddy was always... well... goofy. I get that he likes to play with his victims, but he's supposed to be scary. Terrifying. But most of the time, I just cringed or laughed when I saw him.This movie, on the other hand, takes all of that out and remakes the original movie with some better characters and a better Freddy. Granted, I know Robert is iconic as Freddy and me saying anyone else is better than him is probably blasphemy to the name of horror as a whole, but I don't care. The only Robert Englund Freddy I liked was in Freddy vs Jason. And even then, he was STILL really goofy and weird. I like Jackie Earle Haley better as Freddy. He was more terrifying, more clever, and was able to have fun and laugh without being over the top or goofy. It even remade some of the iconic scenes while introducing new ones. Like the Nancy in the tub with Freddy's hand scene, Kris' death, the body bag scene, Freddy in the walls, and Nancy's mom getting attacked at the end... Ok, so they weren't very original in that regard. But what do you expect from a remake? They probably just wanted to trigger fans' nostalgia. ...That... words. Anyway, they do some new stuff, too. Like the way they get rid of him. ...For a day or so. In the original, Nancy reads a book on traps, sets them up around the house, then goes to sleep. All in the span of, what an HOUR?? That's not even possible. And on top of that, when Freddy's finally out and ready to kill her, she beats him with what? Willpower. She does NOTHING but say that he can't hurt her. And he just vanishes. BORING. The remake has them go to the school. It's this whole thing about Freddy being accused by the kids of hurting them and taking them to his basement, then he gets killed by the parents, kills some of the kids years later after they've forgotten about the whole thing and leading Nancy and Quentin to the pre-school all of this took place in so they can remember, only for them to realize they were telling the truth about it and going to drag him out of their dreams and fight him two on one with a broken paper slicer... thing. And you know what? It's WAY more interesting and believable than anything in the original.

HorrorMovieProjectNET This is a pretty movie. Its apparent from the start, that this remake of the 1984 classic, has a pretty good sized budget to work with. In fact the budget for this incarnation was $35 Million according to Wikipedia. The budget for the Wes Craven original, $1.8 Million. You don't always get a better movie if your budget is huge, look at Avatar. You just get a really pretty movie that looks polished and has flawless special effects. Again, see Avatar. That movie was nothing but flash. The story is unoriginal and weak... and don't try coming at me with this whole "Shut up man! Avatar proved itself!" shut up! The larger budget in this case makes the movie look too polished to be takes seriously. Why the hell are we caring about watching clones of the Twilight teens being chased by Freddy Kruger? Were not. This movie didn't need a budget of $35 Million. It feels wasted. Some of the appeal of the original came from watching the director be a director and figure scenes out. This movie didn't do that. It felt trite and forced.Freddy Kruger is less of a movie villain in the horror industry and more of an icon. Everyone I knew growing up all had Freddy Kruger nightmares when they were a kid. Perhaps this new version of Freddy will serve to scare the poop out of kids these days. I would hope so. Maybe when they remake this movie again in twenty years they will bitch about it then as well. Who knows.