Review of A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) by Kyle A — 29 Sep 2015
Not great, but still underrated. The obvious bad part is unbearable (the non-Robert Englund, mousey-looking Freddy), but the rest is still better than parts 5, New Nightmares and FVJ. It didn't have enough nightmarish elements to the nightmares, nor did the rehashing of part 1 effects (yet somehow not done as well) help, but just give it a chance.
Yeah this Freddy is annoying and not scary nor funny, but I thought the actual Fred Kreuger (pre-death) parts were a breath of fresh air, and the flickers between dream and reality looked nice.
In all reality, none of the franchise is meant to be taken seriously, so this 3 out of 5 stars is within the series, not so much as a film compared to all movies.
From best to worst, in my opinion:
1, 3, Freddy's Dead, 2, 4, this one, NN, 5, then FVJ.
I watch all of these films at least twice a year, every year, so I am fortunate enough to know what I absolutely hate, and what becomes passable over time...lol If you are one of those people who've never seen a Nightmare movie: skip this one and go straight to the first 3 in order!
I hope this helped.
This review of A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) was written by Kyle A on 29 Sep 2015.
A Nightmare on Elm Street has generally received mixed reviews.
Was this review helpful?
