SOUND OFF

1

It sucked.

josh avery on Apr 30, 2010

2

Liked Haley, everything else was just bad acting. Good to see that sucker from twilight get ganked, now its pattinsons turn!

Rooney on Apr 30, 2010

3

Yeah, this movie was just bad... in every aspect. Terrible, terrible stuff. Terrible acting, terrible dialogue, terrible editing, terrible kills, .... . terrible everything. In my entire life I've only regretted buying a movie ticket twice. This was that second time. The person I was with and I kept looking at eachother, shaking our heads, and checking the time. So was the whole theater. Everyone was just scoffing the whole time, or laughing at the stupidity of it all. What a huge disappointment. I went in with super low expectations, too......

Chazzy O on Apr 30, 2010

4

garbage

jimmey on Apr 30, 2010

5

ohhh sooo bad. JEH was a good Freddy though

Jason McGuire on Apr 30, 2010

6

Not good at all except for Haley. I watched Twilight, Terminator, and The Flash all get killed tonite.ahahah. Ohh and did anyone notice the doctor in the hospital was April O' Neil from the original Ninja Turtles movie. Enjoyed trailers for Splice, Resident Evil, Predators, Jonah Hex

Justin D on Apr 30, 2010

7

thanks guys, i mean this leaves me open to say that remakes and imaginings are pointless and execs need to know not to ruin a good story of original value. this one may be baaaad but there have been and will be others. freddy must be turning in his nightmare. that or the studio folk. i was sh*t scared as a 13 year old watching the original on video, so why do this again and watered down ( i havent seen it yet so just assuming from all the reviews ive read) what a let down to all those who went.

bladerunners shoes on Apr 30, 2010

8

Glad I did not go see this film.

Jesus Loves You on Apr 30, 2010

9

Mike Hawk says disregard Justin D's opinions simply because he said he liked the new Resident Evil trailer.

Mike Hawk on Apr 30, 2010

10

I hate to be cynical when it comes to movies but most films nowadays suck. The reason is clear but Hollywood is only in it for the money now. Reboots, prequels, sequels. Movies aren't original anymore. Problem...

Cory on Apr 30, 2010

11

i loved Haley, acting was forgettable, kills were nuts early in the movie, and the end scene made me jump, and hope that they keep the trilogy process in mind, honestly, cause i loved Haley. Was not for everyone, and yes, all in all a horrible example of cinema, or whatever you drama queens think its called these days, but fun spring movie which gave me exactly what i wanted. Stop trying to be a critic people......bad editing? tell me one thing you know about editing. Alex, Im sure you will hate it, but i enjoyed it and knew the acting would be bad, but at least most get killed off

Dustin Fuston on Apr 30, 2010

12

at justin d, yes totally spotted april. in regards to the movie, it wasn't "rob zombie's Halloween 2 bad" but it wasn't great. *spoiler sorta* the first time i saw the trailer i thought Freddy sounded molester-ish and now i see i was accurately assessing it. i think the script was bad but i think katie cassidy was good at delivering bad lines. haley was good as the Krueger they wrote and was great as the pre burnt freddy. i suppose my overall opinion is that it's not as bad it could have been, but it's hard to beat the original, however, the kids of today, i'm sure, think the 80's version is cheesey, and so i think it's a good opportunity for freddy to terrify a new generation, that said i don't think the target market is the new generation.

Scylar D on Apr 30, 2010

13

It was a good remake, though the original is still the best. Fun and bloody!!! check it out and don't mind any of the dumbass comments, have fun and judge for yourself. PLease don't make any more Saw movies, now that sucks!!!

ZombiePride on Apr 30, 2010

14

This was supposed to be a horror movie, right? Or was it a Gossip Girl episode with one real ugly dude in it. I can't stop yawning; should have stayed home and watched Wife Swap instead of going to the drive-in to see this "movie". Please don't make another one, please oh please!

Fred Schepsi on Apr 30, 2010

15

BAD BAD BAD ofc it was BAD you all were "noo you are wrong the trailer is awesome movie must be awesome" and I knew from begining that its gonna suck

GOD on Apr 30, 2010

16

I fell asleep during the movie and had a dream about Freddy panhandling on a street corner. Then I woke up.

Angry Chief on Apr 30, 2010

17

I am, and always have been a horror movie fan. I love horror movies. Now that we got that straight, I must tell you that I didn't really like the remake of Friday the 13th. A Nightmare on Elm Street was the worst remake of a classic horror movie ever. I now look at Friday the 13th (2009) as a much better film, a little too gritty, but much better than the new Freddy. I hated the new Nightmare on Elm Street. If you must see it, I would say I agree with you. Take it from a horror fan, don't! This movie sucked in all aspects of a good horror movie. There was no nudity, no good death scenes, and Freddy just looked like sh*t. Robert Englund, where are you? Come back! Don't waste your money! Wait until this comes out on FX to see it for free. To put it in perspective, if this movie was rated PG it would have the same effect. I could go on for hours as to how much I hated this movie. Which really sucks because I was really looking forward to seeing it. Damn, what happened to Hollywood? I am a horror fan, and I thought remakes were supposed to be for me, for us, and for the fans. What is going on? A Nightmare on Elm Street was terrible, don't see it. Boycott this film, show Hollywood that we won't stand for this mediocre remake of a classic. By the way, this film was dull, and not scary whatsoever. DO NOT PAY TO SEE THIS B.S.

Dave on Apr 30, 2010

18

Sucked ass crack! acting was bad cast was bad story was bad jacky suckes as freddy his face was SOOO BADD and how dare you change the oringal story they did so much better on the friday the 13th remake this was soo poorr ps - did i mention that his voice was exactly the same as warshack in watchmen !! haa lol

kevin on Apr 30, 2010

19

A total waste. Should've never been made.

Alboone on May 1, 2010

20

@11 A fun spring movie? Sounds pretty gay, do ya wear a dress?

Ox 45 on May 1, 2010

21

dang 18...i commented earlier but u nailed it. actually everyone has damned this gutter tripe and descriptively so. keep it coming

bladerunners shoes on May 1, 2010

22

The make up on JEH was terrible. Looked comical more than anything else. Script was atrocious, too on the point. And the acting didn't help either. People in the theatre were actually laughing at the actors and actresses and I don't blame them. The original was so much better. I would have rather spent those $7 buying the original special edition at a used DVD store. As horrible as the Friday the 13th remake was, I had so much more fun with that one than this trash.

Rops on May 1, 2010

23

PLEASE dont go to theaters and dont waste YOUR money on that movie couse they will make another one like that, and another one like that, and another one... you see, what, i'm, trying, to tell you?

GOD on May 1, 2010

24

#18 If you had any sense man you would not have paid to go see this film in the first place. I for one will not be. As soon as I heard they were remaking the film without Englund I refused to even watch any of the trailers. You should have stayed loyal to the original film and not have paid money to watch some young dumb hollywood producers (MICHAEL BAY) stupid remake of a true 80's horror classic!

last son on May 1, 2010

25

I don't get why everyone here hates it.. It was an entertaining Horror movie with decent actors and CG. Well above the average Horror flicks that are out there!

Lincoln on May 1, 2010

26

#25 it WASN'T entertaining horror movie... you haven't seen an entertaining horror movie yet, if you are saying that this boring peace of crap was entertaining.

GOD on May 1, 2010

27

FRom the trailers it looked like the CG was as bad as FvJ.

ryderup on May 1, 2010

28

i only went because i had a free pair of tickets.......... and i'm glad i didn't have to pay - because it sucked. this remake was as bad as what those hollywood boobs did to the remake of "the fog".

beavis on May 1, 2010

29

My wife fell asleep. I never liked the originals really, at least they were never scary. I was hoping for something more but yeah, they killed the mystery of him real quick by showing too much and then when it seemed like it couldn't be a horror movie they turn it into a suspense by making the kids solve a mystery. All they needed was a talking dog...

tra la la la la di da on May 1, 2010

30

my opinion I Liked it.....enuff said

AJ on May 1, 2010

31

I enjoyed it. It was a fun Friday night at the movies. I was entertained. No worse than The Grudge or Shutter. Look, the reality is half you Gen-Y morons wouldn't know a decent movie if it slapped your pimply face in a dark alley. Worry about how your gonna move out from your mom’s basement before you start critiquing movies.

Diplow on May 1, 2010

32

So to the one's who saw it. Would the movie have been better with the legendary true Freddy, Robert Englund? I figured this shit was going to suck, thanks for confirming it.

blue & orange ny on May 1, 2010

33

What's funny is there is so many people praising the original when that was utter trash in the first place. What did you expect?

BeAr on May 1, 2010

34

Since the trailer this stuff looks terrible as the new Fredy´s face... looks like Robert Englund is a Nightmare on elm street like Arnie is a Terminator..without them this franchise just sucks a lot...

Sakyo on May 1, 2010

35

What's with all this talk of April from TMNT being in the movie? There's no listing on IMDb for either April's being in this movie.

Cloudy with a chance of beefaroni on May 1, 2010

36

Wow.... I thought the trailer looked a amazing and even though I am not a fan of Horror movies I was willing to give this a chance, but after reading the general consensus here; that this movie sucked balls I will not be going to see it. Thanks for saving me guys!

Dad on May 1, 2010

37

Does any know how much $$ they put into marketing this ? I've seen endless promos, commercials, and plugs here and their. Just wondering if all the money into marketing was worth it. Although word of mouth is the new best form of marketing.

Aesthetictheory on May 1, 2010

38

I saw it at midnight (not because I'm a huge fan, because I was bored) and they had the volume roscoe dashed, all the way turned up. It was scary as hell. Everyone in the theater was jumping at every loud noise. That being said it was more due to the loudness factor than the scariness. However, It was a pretty enjoyable slasher flick and they did some cool things. It is a good update film because there was a lot to be added with new technology. If you are a horror/slasher fan this is awesome. If not, there is no reason you should see it in the first place. Dumbasses.

jay-z on May 1, 2010

39

I was not impressed entertained, or scared, to be honest I found Jackie funny because the make up job they did on him made him look more like a mentally challenged kid than a burnt serial killer. I think I had more fun looking for actors from other movies like other people said. the acting was bad, the kills were uninspired. But with all the remakes these days the only good horror movies left are the saw movies, but that ends this October.

Kalil on May 1, 2010

40

wow... after reading all the comments: either this movie really sucks or we are a bunch of bitter old men... no. It sucks.

leinergroove on May 1, 2010

41

Well damn universal negative reviews....Think I saw one positive comment on here. Glad I didnt go see it, think Ill go see kick-ass again heh.

Cody w on May 1, 2010

42

I liked this movie! It was better than the original, and it was scarier than the original. The characters were the same, but the way they died were different (some were), and the storyline was a bit different. The dude who played Depp's part though seemed like a douche, and he was barely in the movie.

Peace Love & GaGa on May 1, 2010

43

I'm still going to go see it all horror remakes suck, you need to go in there thinking "this is going to blow" and then take it for what fun it gives. that's what i did for Friday the 13th and Halloween (2 was unbearable though) and i enjoyed both of those movies. not enough to recommend but enough to have fun

DoomCanoe on May 1, 2010

44

You know whats scarier then this film? The Tornado siren blaring in my county. This movie wasn't scary, from minute one.

Xerxex on May 1, 2010

45

@ BeAr – Are you serious. You’re wrong, we can say today they were corny but never trash. I bet you where first in line in the 80’s and listening to thriller. All the remakes, Halloween, Friday and Nightmare have been utter trash, an attempt to bring back an 80’s classic. @ leinergroove – I think we are all 30 and over here so depending your age we can be old men. Never bitter lol

blue & orange ny on May 1, 2010

46

To many people are looking at this movie the wrong way. Yes it's an unnecessary remake of a somewhat horror classic but it's reboot was inevitable. Fanboys are crying that it's garbage before it comes out, I have news for the fanboys: the original was pretty bad too ( and it's one of my favorite slashers).  The story still revolves around Nancy and her peers while they all suffer from nightmares with Freddy trying to kill them. Things get even worse when they find out if you die asleep then you really die. Its pretty true to the original but they changed Freddies backstory and there a few nostalgia moments. The pacing is very break neck but it still remanded suspenseful and the dream sequences were done very very well.  The cast did a surprising job holding the movie together. It was more well acted than the 1984 film, not by much but nothing can be worse than Heather Langenkamps portrayl of Nancy. What's funny is that a lot of people are complaining about this new cast being uninteresting and boring. It's a slasher, there are only good for bodybags not Oscars. Of course the big news was that Jackie Earle was wearing the glove instead of Robert Englund. After seeing him in Watchmen I knew he would give Freddy justice and not only did he give him justice but his portrayl is much better for me. I know in the first Nightmare Freddy was not a stand up comedian yet but he was still kind of corny. Jackies version is light on jokes but when they come there more twisted than corny. I will be very excited for a sequel just to see what he brings. Overall: the newest Nightmare may only be a polished version of the original on speed but it's not bad. 

Jacob Crim on May 1, 2010

47

@ Xerxex Are you seriously comparing a real-life natural disaster to a horror movie that was fiction? That's a totally idiotic comparison. Of course a tornado is scarier than a movie, you can be killed by a tornado and not by a movie. I think a tornado siren would be scarier than any movie ever...knowing that a huge-unstoppable force is coming towards you and could kill you in a second is one of the scariest things ever.

Peace Love & GaGa on May 1, 2010

48

it sucked.

ed on May 1, 2010

49

@Peace And Love and Gaga Come on, you know that was a funny comparsion! I've succeeded in incorporating a real-life situation and a fictional film situation in the same sentence, an easy task yes, but still fun and exciting. Hearing an eerie siren wailing throughout your county is the most frightening experience ever, and if only horror films could frighten me the way a siren does...well that would be amazing! I'm not idiotic, I'm just ahead of the curb.

Xerxex on May 1, 2010

50

This was the worst remake ever and the original was the best they just made freddy look retarded and didn't even really stick to a good story line it was completely pointless remaking it and ruined wes craven's story.

emie on May 1, 2010

51

I've seen it... gezus christ what were they thinking? it wasnt scary at all, Freddy was boring, slow like a zombie. I cant belive that Friday 13'th remake is even better then THIS and all know that Friday 13'th shows only tits and killing and NOTHING else, so how come that its better then new nightmare... 🙁

seyo on May 1, 2010

52

Your an idot to ever say that fucking cast holded the story and movie together ! they all sucked , nacey had a fucking lisp and her mom was a hot milf that didnt even look like her. man you dont know shit on how to point out flaws from a good vs bad flick loll

kevin on May 1, 2010

53

What are you people talking about!?!?! I thought it was a thousand times better then the original flicks! Robert England is a total shit actor! Jackie is just a knockout in this. Whatever

CRaZY OLYPHANT on May 2, 2010

54

BETTER THEN ORIGINAL FLICK! AHAHAHAH THOSE KIDS....

seyo on May 2, 2010

55

Platinum Dunes best remake/film by a mile. It's not even close. It's not flawless by any stretch of the imagination but it's very, very solid. In context with the original series, only the original, part 2, and New Nightmare are better. That's not even up for debate. And, you gotta give Jackie Earle Haley some props here. His Freddy's is unhinged...very similar to Englund's portrayal in part 2. Between the two films, Freddy's not fucking around. There's a method to his madness in this film, even if it's misplaced. But the film, for a spell, makes you think it's not misplaced. I hate the Hollywood trend of remakes like most do but I honestly feel that this is one of the more solid remakes Hollywood's done. It was inevitable. The original series never got it completely right. This remake starts on solid ground to build a foundation to some interesting sequels, if the filmmakers really let loose on the dreamscapes and keep Freddy this unhinged and keep Freddy on his pursuit of his "favorite one."

Cory on May 2, 2010

56

I can't remember the last time i SERIOUSLY thought about walking out of a movie during the movie. i was sooo close to ducking out of this piece of shit 30 minutes in.... it really made the Friday the 13th remake look like a masterpiece. Such a bad movie. Jackie Earle Haley wasn't much to care for either. No really personality to him. The face was terrible too. just looked cheap looking!

Conrad on May 2, 2010

57

but his new face makes him look like a burent victim

jason on May 2, 2010

58

I would have rather watched a MARK WAHLBERG film! FUCK THAT MOVIE! I EVEN FELL ASLEEP AND WISHED THE OLD FREDDY WOULD HAVE KILLED ME SO THAT I WOULDNT HAVE TO WAKE UP KNOWING THAT I HAD TO PAY FOR THIS PILE OF SHIT OF A MOVIE!

Ray on May 2, 2010

59

im a big freddy fan and this sucked major ass

dylan on May 2, 2010

60

Good Lighting, Good Cinematography, The reveal was way to early, and everything else was so so. Overall I give it a C+. But what do you expect, its a remake!

MMH on May 2, 2010

61

I for one love Freddy vs Jason. I won't defend it, I simply have a great time with most of that film. Im afraid that might be the final Freddy flick I enjoy... ... becauase one look at the new Freddy makeup actually made me a little pissed off. I was thinking my god, if they didnt even take Freddys face work seriously, what the hell is the rest of the movie going to be worth? Total pass. A very passionate pass at that. Turns out, Englund IS Freddy, and might be only person that can ever successfully play him.

Mark D on May 2, 2010

62

Jackie Earle Haley was an awesome Freddy. I would like to see a second one made. obviously a lot of you douchebags didn't like it. And when I say Douchebags I mean the pricks who haven't respected other peoples opinions in previous posts, so I'm saving my time and not respecting yalls...how the fuck was the face cheap looking? he looked like a real burn victim...there's no pleasing some of you assholes.

Colt on May 2, 2010

63

Personally, I never had very high expectations for this remake, however being a fan of the original, I coughed up the $10 to see it in hopes that it would at the very least be an entertaining popcorn flick for a Friday night. I was very, very disappointed. I would have to say that I enjoyed Freddy vs. Jason better then this snooze-fest. To me, Haley seemed to take everything that made Freddy unique, and run in the completely opposite direction with it. Freddy quickly melted down into the same tired cliche of horror serial killer, only with the iconic glove. Don't get me wrong, I loved Haley as Rorschach in Watchmen, and maybe he did the best with what he had to work with for this film. However, his overall performance as Krueger was forgettable at best. The dream sequences were for the most part, unoriginal copies of the sequences from the first film, the supporting cast was completely unbelievable, and yes, I also thought Haley's makeup was terrible. (He might as well have put on a hockey mask, which might have saved him the frustration of not being able to display the slightest facial movement in that latex) My personal opinion: Save your money, rent the original.

Will on May 2, 2010

64

So horrible...I thought I was bored out of my skull cuz I usually dislike horror movies but the film is just bad. I got home and watched the first one (That I hadn't seen since I was a child) that happened to be streaming on Netflix. At least you can appreciate that one as a movie, has some good humor and is just trippy the way Freddy is prortrayed and really for what it is is a top notch film. I can't say enough how boring the new one was...I mean it is a great concept but the remake deserves every bit of the low rating it got. Freddy is really dead this time.

bdog on May 2, 2010

65

Robert England is freddy that is his role and he did it way better, his voice sounded better and his face looked better, and Heather Langenkamp was great at Nancy, you can not beat the original and it was horrible acting, not that I expected it to be any good or no where near the original, and you cares if he looks like a real burn victum he looked dumb and if any of you were big on the a nightmare on elm street movies you would understand that it sucked so bad and was so dissapointing...

emie on May 2, 2010

66

Robert England is freddy! That is his role and he did it way better, his face look better, and his voice sounded better, and you cares if the new guy looks like a real burn victum he looks retarded and Heather was the best Nancy and she was smarter in her role than the new one and it had a great story line, so if you were ever big on the nightmare on elm street films like I was you would know that this sucked so bad and was very dissapointing, not that I expected it to be good or no where near the original...

- emie on May 2, 2010

67

I am big on the originals...and I enjoyed this one. apparently I'm more open-minded then everyone else here. Jackie did an awesome job. period.

Colt on May 2, 2010

68

Colt! you dont have to be open-minded to like this peice of shit, you just have like horrible movies to like this movie!

Ray on May 2, 2010

69

Best remake ever!! Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot!!

MikeySpikey on May 2, 2010

70

IGNORE THE NAY SAYERS!! While this movie was not TDK, it was not THAT bad either. It gave an interesting look at what made Freddy tick, and there was never really a dull moment. I grew up with the originals, and I can easily say that this was fun enough to watch. The pace was steady, and the cast did a good job with what they had to work with. I swear half these people think they've personally made tons of movies the way they discredit them. If you want to check out a decent pop corn horror flick, this remake is a good way to burn away 90 minutes.

Brandon on May 3, 2010

71

Freddy looked like he had down syndrome.

Erik keating on May 3, 2010

72

Thank you Brandon. The fanboys are acting like the original is the damn Godfather. I think this new fil is a great start to what turned out to be a literal joke of a franchise. And if you guys really think the original had good acting you really really do not know what good acting is half the dialog was laughable... What did Rod say "up yours with a twisting lawn mower!" WTF does that even mean?

Jacob Crim on May 3, 2010

73

I personally am a huge fan of the original series. I like the concept, but never really saw the franchise live up to its potential. Everytime I went to see one of the new movies I would say to myself "self; This will be the time they live up to its full potential". Unfortunately it never did. This new crapfest of a movie sucked in so many ways. First there was no reason to have to go back and redo the first movie. The story was established and you could have gone in any direction from that point. Second, I believe live effects and stunts are so much better then CGI. CGI looks fake 99 percent of the time, and no one leaves the theater anymore wondering how they pulled off an effect. Sure the effects may have been more elaberate, but the original effects were more convincing. third, the new freddy just plain sucks. Forth, if there was anything they could have done to make this series have a great new start, it would have been to try an explain how Freddy was able to survive in the dreamworld to begin with. How did he become this ultimate evil? Michael Bay allowed the movie to be turned into a stupid creature slasher. I mean, Freddy looked like Jeepers Creepers! Robert Englund will always be Freddy, but if they want to try and replace him, they should at least emulate his style rather then redesign a character people have liked for more then 25 years. Just my two cents.

Shannon on May 3, 2010

74

Hell Shannon they might emulate him in a sequel, have him doing his stand up bit again.

Jacob Crim on May 3, 2010

75

What ever happened to trying to make stories believable? I mean I'm all for suspension of disbelief. But I can only play stupid for so long! This movie was full of holes. The scene in which Nancy finds the the pictures her mom was hiding...I mean WTF!? To start with why would she hide them in her dresser at all? Toss them away! Then she explains who Freddy Kruger was and what he did, so thats why they are having these nightmares. So its all good, they are only nightmares...nightmares won't hurt you. Oh ya but having three kids in the neighborhood die from having the same nightmares! That's of no consequence! This movie felt like the rest of the world stopped unless the camera was filming it. Made no sense at all! Rent the old ones instead...don't bother with this garbage!

Chris on May 3, 2010

76

MOVIE SUCKED SO BAD!!!!

ANdrew on May 3, 2010

77

What the hell did they do to this one!??? SERIOUSLY???? I've seen all the Freddy movies and this one ugh!!! it really sucked BISON BALLS- that's just IT folks no way else to cut it I don't care who you are. I saw the majority of it online but after all those stupid hotshot one liners they kept pulling like the dead dog scene where Freddy says " I was just trying to pet him" then telling one of his victims "why are you screaming I haven't cut you yet" do you people have any idea how stupid that sounds? my god it's amazing. You can tell it was just the little things that really ruined the movie it was just so forced like constantly using the little blonde dead girls that sing "one two Freddy's coming for you" just to get the audience member back into nostalgia of the original Freddy movies. Another scene that ruined it for me was when they had Freddy stretch himself inside the walls just like the original movie had that and it was so CGI'ed or whatever. ugh. And then we have Freddy himself and whoever that crappy actor was who played him with his forced crappy low tone voice with the help of a computer eh? it all sounded FORCED and it's a pity BECAUSE THERE IS NO OTHER ROBERT ENGLUND!! that can do it better. And you know one thing about the old Freddy is yeah he's this burnt up disfigured thing that has a face from hell though he doesn't completely look like a burn victim and that in a way made him scarier to me while the new Freddy in this new movie he just completely looked like burn victim down syndrome combined. I don't what they were thinking. Don't waste your money people sad to say to all the Freddy fans but trust me it's another thrown together piece of sh*t teen horror flick. Not to mention the beginning of the movie how many times are we going to see lame atmospheric songs play at the start of the movie? That's like in EVERY horror movie. Usually people who like this piece of crap are probably tolerant of humping a fat guy in bed or you just too tolerant and are willing to take any piece of remake garbage and like it? Or some of you are just not being realistic and aren't willing to criticize any Freddy Kruger movie because your too fanatical?

suck my tits on May 4, 2010

78

Sure, there are a lot worse things to do in 90 minutes. I agree with that. So, if you have nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing else to do...go see this. I hope they don't make any sequels. Let this franchise die. Englund was, and is, the only Freddy. I think that the people who say that I shouldn't have an opinion on a movie because I haven't "made" a movie are complete idiots. Thats right I called you an idiot. It IS my opinion that counts. Period. I am a TRUE horror fan, and whoever made this piece of garbage might as well pounded me in the ass. Because that is the way I felt about this trash. I actually went to the midnight showing on opening night. I was hopelessly optimistic about this film, boy was I wrong. The only thing good about this movie was the trailer. If you claim to be a fan of the horror genre, and claim to have liked this, you are a misguided soul and should take a class from me in what horror movies are actually good. A Final Destination was better than this. Damn, I cant believe how much I hated this movie. Oh, one comment was that Jackie looked like a true burn victim. How would you know? Besides, Freddy attacks you in your dreams...so couldn't they make him look more frightening, or on fire? It's a dream not reality. Make his blades red hot, so the would cauterize, and him with a scary voice. Jackie's voice sounded stupid. Stop sucking Hollywood. Maybe Machete, and Predators will be good. At least Robert Rodriquez is still making some good movies.

Dave on May 5, 2010

79

Firstly, there are some utter tards commenting on here. Secondly to those commenting negatively, you are wrong! This was an amazing film a true hark back to 80's horror. Haley shat all over Englunds camp performance and made the character of Freddy truely scarey. Sure there were a few dodgy edits, a bit of dodgy CGI, and yes some of the acting was more wooden than pinnochios pencil. Though overall it was an amazing reimagining of the original. Stop bitching about it and appreciate it for what it was.

Darren on May 5, 2010

80

i am a huge fan of the nightmare on elm street franchise, freddy is the best killer of all of the classics. i was totally taken away at first the thought of freddy being a pedophile, but it portrays the sick older men out there that do these horrific things to young boys and girls, that concept was interesting to me. he wasnt comical like the fredy that robert england gave us from back in the day but JEH did one hell of fine acting job on a darker, more evil, bent on revenge towards the kids who ratted him out, then the freddy who killed first the kids of the parents who killed him by burning him to death. i saw the midnight showing on thursday/friday, and it was great, there was even a kid dressed up in a full kruger suit gloves shirt mask and all, it was so shocking for the staff of the movie theatre to see that they had asked him to remove his mask lol. i hope they continue this series and show us how freddy can evolve into scaring us even when we arent dreaming of him.

Ryan$ on May 5, 2010

81

I too was disappointed. I've been a HUGE Freddy Krueger fan for years. In fact I've even met Robert Englund (funny guy and really cool) and this was NO Nightmare on Elm Street film. Personally I couldn't stand the remake of Friday the 13th and I still think this was better, but not by much. My wife kept telling me for months during the trailers "Freddy looks retarded" and I'd say "Honey I'm seeing it no matter what, regardless of how retarded Freddy looks". I was wrong. The movie wasn't the worst I've seen, but Jackie Earl Haley DOES NOT a good Freddy Krueger make. I mean the friggin' GLOVE was even changed! Are you kidding me? It wasn't a huge change, but it was still a change none-the-less. 75: to add to what you said, try this one: So Freddy was a pedophile and was molesting little 5yr old kids, he's killed, blah blah blah. My question is THIS: WTF caused EVERY one of these kids to COMPLETELY FORGET something that probably happened 10 to 12 years ago?! I remember stuff from when I was younger and I'm almost 40! Were they all in an accident and were given amnesia?! How could they NOT remember something like that?! Either way I will sadly buy it I'm sure when it hits BD, but only because I'm a huge Freddy Krueger fan and it still has the name. 🙁

JeRrYFaR on May 6, 2010

82

So it sucked. Why am I NOT surprised!

John Doe on May 7, 2010

83

OK THANKS FOR SAVING MY MONEY I WILL WATCH KICKASS AGAIN FUCKING HELLL YEAH HIRL GIRL HIRL GIRL HIRL GIRL HIRL GIRL HIRL GIRL HIRL GIRL HIRL GIRL

Richard on May 10, 2010

84

the new nightmare on elm street really sucked. it didnt played the music, it wasnt scary, and fready didnt look or sound scary like the old one. im calling comcast in the morning so i can get my $4.99 back lol. thats how bad that movie really is. it sucks more than jeepers creapers 1 and 2. guys and girl, do not buy or rent this movie. it really f*cking SUCKS!!!!!!!

David on Oct 8, 2010

85

I am feeling violated worse than the poor kids in the storyline!!! That is a part of my life I can never get back! Way to destroy a great childhood scary film! Dull Dull Dull....

stricken02 on Oct 11, 2010

86

sucked was nothing like the original

chasity on Oct 30, 2010