A Nightmare on Elm Street

“at its running time 1 h 30 min. this movie is superbly paced and is involving from start till finish”

badshapedabout 0–100% inread it ↗

“the end is almost as well can scare viewers”

rive040about 85–100% inread it ↗

“The whole final act is so entertaining, I loved it!”

HellHoleHorrorabout 75–100% inread it ↗

“Sadly, ending does take away from the overall movie.”

AudienceMember1about 85–100% inread it ↗

“I think the bedroom scene is superior to the same attack scene in the original; it’s more shocking.”

Wuchakabout 10–20% inread it ↗

“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”

RottenPopread it ↗

“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.”

Andre Gonzalesread it ↗

“**Unfairly Misunderstood Masterpiece.** I cannot express how unfairly judged and misunderstood this remake is. Instead of being another Elm Street sequel with the sole purpose of creative kills, jokes, unnecessary characters, and lazy revelations. The filmmakers decided to take a risky creative decision by reinterpreting Wes Craven's original ideas and retelling the story with a much more realistic tone. The dream sequences are more symbolic and atmospheric. The story explores real-life po”