What is there to be said about Nightmare that hasn\'t been said yet? For people fresh to the fold, it\'s a decent enough movie, with its scary moments and plenty of teen blood on the walls to entertain well enough. For returning members of Freddy\'s long-running series of nightmares, it\'s atrocious. Without Englund, Freddy feels awkward and poorly imitated by the man who gave us Rorshak from Watchmen. They could have tried better, yes, on Freddy\'s overall look, as the makeup vaguely resembles an oversized rat at the best of times and for heaven\'s sake, did they have to try taking it ALL the way back to the days when all he did was use the glove? Part of the appeal of Freddy Kruegar was the originality in his delivery and the manic way he seemed to ENJOY warping reality to humiliate and play with his victims before delivering the coop de grace. Further, what made him entertaining was that he was a child MURDERER. Spoiler alert: they made Freddy into a raving pervert for this movie and nothing more. To sum it all up, the bad points are that Freddy himself just sucked. Now, the GOOD stuff. The idea of a 72 hour limit was interesting, and the thought that there is literally NO escape from dreams was terrifying in its own right. You knew Freddy had you no matter what you did in this movie, and that gave it a new edge to an old razor glove. Could they have done better? Yeah, definately. Could they have done worse? Oh yeah they could. I give this movie a three out of five for making it halfway to the mark, but ultimately falling short of what we love about our resident master of nightmares, but at the same time giving us something fresh. Put Englund (or at least someone with his energy) back in the makeup and let\'s try this again, hollywood. Tanks for reading, fellow movielovers!
be the first to rate