A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989) review

(3/10)

   This is perhaps the strangest and weirdest addition to the famous horror franchise. A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child is a mix of hit-and-miss performances, terrible effects, and a weird, overly-cheesy tone. It was as if the filmmakers decided to make a fan film rather than an actual installment.

PLOT: Alice (Lisa Wilcox) has been living her life peacefully with a loving boyfriend, Dan (Danny Hassel), and also has a baby on the way. Until recently, notorious nightmare-killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) had been destroyed and cut off from the real world. However, Krueger eventually finds a new way, using her baby's dreams to access the real world and kill more teenagers. Even worse, Krueger is "feeding" these souls to Alice's baby in the womb, brainwashing him to be Krueger's apprentice. Krueger has a more obvious weak spot this time, as he's afraid of his mother, Sister Amanda Krueger (Beatrice Boepple), who appears in the nightmares as well. Sister Krueger wants to capture her son back and keep him from killing anyone else. Somehow, Alice has to get Krueger away from her kid and quite possibly in the hands of Sister Krueger. The plot in itself is preposterous and executed in an illegible, illogical (at least in terms of the series) way. I'm starting to think the series should have ended with the previous installment. Because of this execution, nothing can even be taken seriously, for one would just laugh and queston how any of this makes any sense at all.

ACTING: The performances in this strange installment were mainly hit-and-miss, with Englund and Wilcox being the lead performances. They both did decent job, but in truth, all performances were rather messed up due to an awkward, unfunny script. Most people laughed at Krueger's cheesy kill jokes in the previous movies; however, the script is so bad in this addition that Krueger's lines couldn't even inspire a chuckle. A couple of other performances were decent, including Nick Mele as Dennis Johnson and Danny Hassel as Dan. They weren't exceptional, but definitely tolerable.

SCORE: The score in this one is way over-dramatic and unnecessary. It makes the movie feel like it's taking itself way too serious.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this movie, for the most part, were complete garbage. Everything looked goofy, fake, and just plain embarrassing for any horror movie in general to have. The only effects that were fairly decent would be the few claymation and digital effects. They were cool, but buried beneath the stinking heap of effects preceded by them. If you laugh at anything in this movie, laugh at how bad the effects are.

OTHER CONTENT: Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child is just a strange, unnecessary installment to a franchise that would have been better left alone. Everything feels weird, preposterous, and exhausted, as no variety is added to the franchise. If Krueger even fails to satisfy, the movie shouldn't have existed. The only emotions one could leave this movie with are embarrassment and confusion, for that's what this attempt at a horror movie is: a confusing embarrassment.

   A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child should not exist. There was no reason to make the movie except the possibility of making money off of trash. Terrible script, goofy special effects, and a preposterous plot pull this movie down to the bottom of the barrel. I suggest if anyone's a Freddy fan, skip this installment. None of it is even necessary.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988) review

(5/10)

   In almost every major horror franchise or series there's a singular film within that certain series that is neither really bad nor really good. For the Freddy films, A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master fits this description. The movie's performances and overall quality falls, but not too far, as Freddy's nightmares are more fun-to-watch than they've been thus far. The scare factor isn't totally lost, but it is barely there as compared to the previous films that were actually good.

PLOT: Taking place several years after the last movie, Kristen (Tuesday Knight), now released from the mental facility, has been having reoccurring nightmares where she finds herself in Freddy's house, but with no signs of life. Kristen still pulls her old friends, Kincaid (Ken Sagoes) and Joey (Rodney Eastman), who are also out of the institution, into her dreams. They begin the get annoyed with this and try to reassure her that Freddy's dead for good. However, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) is resurrected and begins to appear in the Elm Street teens dreams. Freddy has grown more powerful than ever, killing the original Elm Street kids. However, before she passes, Kristen makes a friend from class named Alice (Lisa Wilcox), whom she pulls into her dream and gives her "dream powers" to after Freddy kills her. Now, when Alice dreams of Freddy, she pulls a classmate in by accident and gains the skill of whatever that person was good at when Freddy kills them. Alice alone is the only person who can stop Freddy from taking the lives of the innocent teens on Elm Street. The plot is very well thought out, but relatively flat. After the old Elm Street kids are killed (which is early on in the movie), not much changes. In fact, the plot is forgotten and rushed into a kind of way where there's a nightmare/kill every ten minutes. The movie is mainly made up of kills with a premise but nothing else. The plot is trashed for stylistic killing.

ACTING: The performances in the movie aren't the best but aren't the worst either. Englund, Sagoes, and Eastman come back to reprise their roles, which they do fine job of. In this addition, Freddy is seen more throughout the movie and more of his character is shown, displaying for the audience how clever and sadistic Krueger can be. Switching out Patrica Arquette for Tuesday Knight was an overall bad choice, for she didn't give off the same effect as Arquette in the role. However, she wasn't the worst person they could've chosen.The only newer performance that was worth any significance was Lisa Wilcox as Alice. She was definitely a good person to give the lead role to, as she didn't show it any dishonor or cruelty. None of the other performances are really good or worth remembering. The rest of the cast just played their roles and fairly flatly.

SCORE: The score in this addition is creepier and more prevalent, led by lesser-known Craig Safan, who went on to score more movies. This nightmare also, like its predecessor, had a few original songs. However, they weren't as good or memorable as those in Nightmare 3.

EFFECTS: The special effects are pretty well done overall in this Freddy movie. The effects aren't the very best, but they definitely are quite remarkable. A gruesome roach transformation, a soul-sucking kiss, and even a peek inside of Freddy's collection of souls make this movie feel like an underrated special effects marvel. Though reeking of B-movie madness, the effects do their job well.

OTHER CONTENT: A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master is neither a dramatic fall or triumphant rise from its predecessor. In fact, you could say this one was made strictly to entertain without completely sucking it up. This idea is evident in adding more scenes with Krueger and speeding up the kill frequency. The movie does feel like it was made in a hurry, but it doesn't deter it from being any less entertaining. The blood flows freely and the audience is left to laugh at or uncomfortably watch Freddy's many antics and stylish kills. This one was purely made for entertainment and giving the general audience what they want: more Fred and more violence.

   A Nightmare On Elm Street 4: The Dream Master is truly an underrated B-movie as compared to the series; it's actually entertaining but nothing to take seriously in any way, form, or fashion. The performances and plot (or lack thereof) failed, but the entertaining antics of Krueger and his stylized torture is enough to numb a horror fan's mind and entertain the masses.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) review

(7/10)

   Indeed an improvement from its predecessor but not topping the first, A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors revives the franchise from the death it was previously put in. Improved performances, cooler special effects, and an even balance between hilarity and terror earn this addition respect within the franchise.

PLOT: Once again on Elm Street, infamous nightmare serial killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), is terrorizing the teens that reside in the area. He tricks young, misunderstood teen, Kristen Parker (Patricia Arquette) into slitting her wrists resulting in her admission to the local youth  mental hospital. Within the institution, she meets several problematic teens with the same common problem as her: Freddy Krueger coming to kill in their dreams. The problem has hopes to be remedied, though, when older Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) becomes the secretary at the hospital and ways to help remedy the teens worries with their nightmares. However, Freddy seems to be getting more and more powerful as he takes the lives from the last of these Elm Street children. He gets harder to beat, and harder to try and conquer as the chief staff in the hospital disagree with Nancy and allied Dr. Neil Gordon's (Craig Wasson) methods in helping the tormented teenagers. The plot is very interesting and well executed. Putting Krueger in a mental hospital with a bunch of teenagers is similar to letting a hungry Rottweiler in a house full of cats. It's brutal and entertaining to watch, but expected. The many twists and turns of this plot, also, are very effective and very well done. The story is very much alive in this Nightmare.

ACTING: The performances in this Freddy film are very much improved than in its predecessor. Veteran actors Robert Englund and Heather Langenkamp reprise their roles as Freddy Krueger and Nancy Thompson with a certain chemistry. The two characters approach as age-old enemies though we feel these two have been each others age-old foil, for they both possess similar qualities but are very much the opposite. Langenkamp has even improved from the last one, establishing a character outside of the intense segments. The rest of the performances are excellently done, especially those of Patrica Arquette as Kristen, Ken Sagoes as haunted teen Kincaid, Jennifer Rubin as former junkie Taryn, Bradley Gregg as sleepwalking Phillip, Ira Heiden as paraplegic Will, Laurence Fishburne as orderly Max, and special appearances by John Saxon as Mr. Thompson and Zsa Zsa Gabor as herself. The cast here, though some are young, are very well played. Everyone plays their respective parts as though they had been that character their whole life.

SCORE: The score is very well done and as familiar as the first Freddy score. This soundtrack is different, however, with the addition of two songs ("Into the Fire", "Dream Warriors") by hair metal band Dokken. "Dream Warriors" lives to be a memorable track still, especially around this season.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this one are miles better than its predecessor. The effects are still used for a cheesy type of appeal, but this time they don't look as cheap or crudely made. From the Freddy-snake to Philip's puppet walk to each individual characters death scene (for those who do die), the effects are noticeably better but still used to get a kind of cheesy, B-movie effect.

OTHER CONTENT: The third Nightmare is miles better than its attempt at a predecessor. The story is thicker, along with the performances, and the balance of funny and scary is yet again in place. However, this one just feels funnier than the first, as the kills get increasingly more specific and ridiculous. However, this is not bad. We find ourselves laughing at Freddy, as if he were a clown performing for our entertainment. It is in this Nightmare movie where Freddy starts to feel like less of a serial killer and more of a stylish murderer. Freddy entertains and thrills, inspiring a few devious chuckles from the horror-loving audience it intends to please. Nightmare 3 is definitely a true horror at heart, however. Though Freddy comes out as funny, he still thrills us in this film, as we still think inside of how gruesome each way would be to die.

   Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors is definitely the revival of a long-lost franchise. Everything has improved tremendously, from the cast's performance to the special effects. The balance of scare and fun factor is successfully brought back, showing its fun face more often than it ever has. Freddy Krueger is an entertainer for his devoted audience, but a tremor for all of those who take his kills seriously. With a more developed story as well, this flick rises to an enjoyable Freddy feast.  

A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985) review

(3/10)

   Compared to its legendary predecessor, the first sequel to Wes Craven's memorable franchise is quite terrible. Everything is a major fall from the first film. Most of the performances are very hollow and inexperienced, the mechanics of the movie are very ridiculous, and instead of scares, we have unintentional laughs. In comparison to the first, A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls into so-bad-it's-good territory, and is in no way a worthy addition to Craven's horror canon.

PLOT: After his family moves into the old house on Elm Street, young and awkward Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton) starts to have terrifying dreams of former serial killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund). Even more terrifying than that is the fact that Freddy wants to recruit Jesse as a type of apprentice. Though Jesse doesn't want anything to do with it, he finds out over time that he can't control his decision to kill, for Freddy's begun to control him. With only the support of his best friend, Ron Grady (Robert Russler) and his girlfriend, Lisa Webber (Kim Myers), Jesse must fight his urge to kill and get rid of Freddy for good. The plot sounds like a good idea, but ends up just being preposterous. There's no boundaries between dreams and real life in this Krueger movie; Freddy attacks and effects the scenery almost everywhere, not limiting to dreams anymore. This throws off the whole concept of the movie and pretty much ruins the movie and makes it confusing. The plot is overly ridiculous and preposterously executed.

ACTING: The performances were not so great in this Freddy "film". The only performance that showed a spark of effort was, of course, Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger. Englund stays true to the attitude of his character. No one else in this movie even showed a hint of experience. Mark Patton is almost completely unfitting for the part of Jesse and Kim Myers is actually as wooden as a tree. Had this cast had a bit of experience, this movie may have had a bit more potential.

SCORE: The score is really nothing special and fantastic in this one. It enhanced the few moments of unease, but it wasn't anything truly significant.

EFFECTS: The effects in this Nightmare movie are hit and miss with most being misses. The strange part is that the effects in the movie seemed to slowly deteriorate from decent to terrible and cheap. The blood is still true, but the means of killing and the more grotesque scenes are just plain cheap. It feels like they squandered every dollar they had on everything else, unsuccessfully, and settled for cheap props and visual effects.

OTHER CONTENT: The only good things about this sad attempt at accompanying a classic are the hilarious one-liners and the unintentional humor. This movie is funny in places it shouldn't be. It takes itself too seriously for what it really is, which is a simple attempt at milking a franchise too early. However, the actually funny one-liners help save the movie from sinking into complete stupidity. In every other aspect, however, this movie fails. Had Craven been in the director's chair this round, Nightmare 2: Freddy's Revenge would have been an excellent addition to the franchise.

   Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls far from the original classic its concept came from. Except for Englund, none of the performances were worth anybody's time. The special effects aren't so special and the main idea is shattered in a preposterous change in plot mechanics. This whole movie is a horror experiment gone wrong. As a matter of fact, I'd call it the true "nightmare" after falling so far from the classic predecessor's quailty.

A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984) review

(9/10)

   The film that launched both Wes Craven's career and a major horror franchise is definitely no nightmare. A Nightmare On Elm Street remains to be one of the most classic horror films today, containing probably the most memorable horror film villain, an excellent cast, a distinct plot, and an entertaining mix of creepy imagery and cheesy kills. It feels much like going through a haunted fun-house, causing you to scream in terrifying enjoyment.

PLOT: Things start getting strange on Elm Street when the local teenagers start dreaming about a man named Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), a burnt serial killer with knives on his hands who seems to be killing them in their sleep. One concerned teen in particular, Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp), starts to notice and spread the word as quick as she can, to the disbelief of her parents but the undying support of her boyfriend, Glen Lantz (Johnny Depp) and framed "killer", Nick Corri (Jsu Garcia). Things start to get weirder as Nancy delves deeper into the mystery and finds out Freddy was a real local serial killer who used to murder children but was burnt to death in a not-so-accidental fire. Now, he's come back in teen's dreams to torture and kill once again in his humorous way. The plot was very unique and distinct for its time. The plot finds strength in its impressive storytelling and proper use of suspense, prompting just the right time for a jump scare, every time.

ACTING: The performances in this film are pretty excellent for a horror film of its kind. Heather Langenkamp seemed shaky at some points as the tormented Nancy, but during the most critical times of fear and intensity, she owned the role like no one else would ever be able to. Robert Englund established the part of serial killer, Freddy Krueger, almost as infamously as Krueger's crimes in Elm Street. The rest of the cast played their roles very well, including the career-launching performance from Johnny Depp as Nancy's love interest/best guy friend, Glen. The cast may not be perfect (excluding Englund), but I couldn't picture it any other way.

SCORE: Charles Bernstein creates a truly chilling yet simple theme for Krueger's character and many entrances, while adding plenty of emotion and paranoia to each moment of suspense leading up to the jumps. The score isn't as memorable as that of such horror gems like Halloween and The Exorcist, but it's still nevertheless chilling.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this film are pretty awesome and well done. The gruesome outcomes of Krueger's kills are created in such a way that it seems almost believable and not an obvious trick of technology, as these modern horror flicks seem to embrace. The blood is real and flows as true and plentiful as the Mississippi River, the make-up effects of Krueger seem authentic and very well done, and the many little scares along the way are enhanced by each effect used.

OTHER CONTENT: This horror film is one of the most memorable and even a classic in horror film history. However, don't take it too seriously. Nightmare is very authentically creepy and shocking in parts, but the many strange perks to Krueger's scares and methods almost seem darkly comical. The cheesiest of scares seems like a fun laugh, as of that in a haunted house attraction. This film is a very memorable and creepy one, but it's also a lot of fun for true horror fans everywhere. It doesn't create a very serious mood, like that of the two classics I've mentioned before, but it's definitely a more fun classic in the true horror canon.

  Wes Craven truly did strike gold with creating A Nightmare On Elm Street, establishing a horror franchise more memorable or infamous than any other you could name, including Friday the 13th or Halloween. An excellent cast, unique plot, very real-looking effects, fun-yet-creepy scares, and a truly memorable horror villain all lead this film's way into the hearts, memories, and of course, dreams, of horror fans all over.

Dark Shadows (2012) review

(7/10)

   Tim Burton and Johnny Depp team up once again to bring us a movie with just enough gothic charm and dramatic twists to keep it afloat, though very derivative of Burton's past works. Though effective in entertaining the masses, Dark Shadows proves to be one of Burton's weakest films.

PLOT: Barnabus Collins (Johnny Depp) was once the child of a very wealthy family, whom the town of Collinsport is named after. Things are going very well for Barnabus until he decides to break the heart of Angelique Bouchard (Eva Green), an evil witch who curses his family with bad luck throughout the rest of their lives. Not only does Angelique curse the entire family, but she also hypnotizes Barnabus' current lover off a cliff and turns Barnabus into a vampire, cursed to live forever locked in a coffin underground. Many years down the road, in the early 1970s, the Collins family is still living, led by Elizabeth (Michelle Pfieffer) and Roger Collins (Jonny Lee Miller), but they are definitely not as rich as they used to be. Their son, David (Gully McGrath), is being "helped" by alcoholic psychiatrist, Dr. Julia Hoffman (Helena Bonham Carter), and their daughter Carolyn (Chloe Grace Moretz) is very strange. Things get even stranger for the family when Barnabus is dug up by accident and released to walk the Earth again. Barnabus has plans to restore his family honor, though he becomes distracted by the still-living witch plotting his downfall and the Collins' family aide, Victoria Winters (Bella Heathcote), who greatly resembles the woman the witch hypnotized off the cliff that fateful day. The plot is somewhat basic, but executed excellently. The amount of dramatic twists this movie takes isn't phenomenal, but it accumulates enough to save this movie from having a kind of "hollow" plotline. Without the twists, we'd just have a backstory with no more excitement.

ACTING: The performances in this movie are all very brilliantly done. Johnny Depp plays a fantastic part as the gothic Barnabus Collins. Helena Bonham Carter and Eva Green complimented his character well with their performances as Dr. Hoffman and the witch, Angelique. Other fantastic performances came from Chloe Grace Moretz as Carolyn, Bella Heathcote as Victoria Winters, Jackie Earle Haley as housekeeper Mr. Loomis, the late great Christopher Lee as Clarney, and of course, the cameo of shock-rocker Alice Cooper. Each performance only enhanced the gothic and dramatic tone of the movie.

SCORE: The score and soundtrack in this movie are both amazing. Though familiar, the great Danny Elfman conducts an excellent score for the movie. The soundtrack includes classics from artists such as The Moody Blues, Donovan, and, of course, Alice Cooper. Each compliments its own scene accurately.

EFFECTS: The special effects, though flashy, are effective and well done. The effects of Angelique's injuries, the ghost in the manor, the werewolf near the end, and Barnabus himself were probably the most unique and well detailed.

OTHER CONTENT: Dark Shadows isn't a bad movie by far. It's entertaining, bearing an all-star cast, a killer soundtrack, and supple dramatic elements. However, this is probably the movie Tim Burton put his least effort into. Unlike Burton's other works, Dark Shadows misses out on an inner meaning or purpose, rather than to just entertain the masses. However, much like Burton's other works, Dark Shadows tries to convey a sort of realism through a unique, dynamic character. This movie fails at that as it does nothing to convey a true meaning.

   Dark Shadows is like a poor man's Edward Scissorhands; it uses some of the same story elements, such as the dynamic character in a surreal environment, but it fails in conveying a true meaning like Burton's past works. Though led by a superb cast, classic soundtrack, and well-executed plot twists, Dark Shadows feels more like a shot at making money by entertaining the masses. The movie is entertaining, but contains little true substance or significance.

Memory (2006) review

(7/10)

   Memory is probably one of the most underrated horror movies of its kind. Stellar acting, an enthralling mystery, and some truly creepy imagery kept this semi-confusing and somewhat slow movie afloat. It's a poor man's psychological thriller at best.

PLOT: After accidentally ingesting a hallucinogenic powder being tested on lab rats, Dr. Taylor Briggs (Billy Zane) starts to have strange daydreams, lining up with real murders and tragedies that happened before he was born. After some intense research, things start to get more and more peculiar as Taylor starts to think he's witnessing the past of one of his relatives. Everyone begins to think he's gone crazy, except his lover, artist Stephanie (Tricia Helfer), his mother, Carol (Ann-Margret), and his father-in-law, Max (Dennis Hopper). However, as Taylor and Stephanie start getting to the bottom of these weird visions, they start to notice it may be the missing link in Taylor's family timeline. The plot is essentially a combination of the premise of Altered States and the mechanics of Memento. The plot, at its bare bones, is preposterous and confusing, but by the end of the movie, you'll be impressed to see how they pulled it off. The moments of horror are filmed excellently and the writers, though they got carried away, succeeded in tying up all loose ends.

ACTING: The performances in this movie are very well done. Billy Zane does justice to the part of frantic Dr. Briggs, Tricia Hefler does a great job as the "sidekick", Stephanie. Dennis Hopper and Ann-Margret did an excellent job as the parents, especially Ann-Margret near the end. Everyone does a pretty great job with their parts.

SCORE: The score and soundtrack definitely has potential. The main theme is pretty haunting yet simple, and the alternative soundtrack almost enhances the movie.

OTHER CONTENT: Memory is basically an expected disaster turned good. The movie has its faults, like a preposterous mystery, unnecessary side-conversations, and several confusing turns of events. As evidence is tossed at us and pieced together, the mystery becomes more and more confusing, but just as much enthralling. The victory in this movie is that it succeeded in pulling off a mystery so unrealistic. If the unintentionally-good mystery isn't enough to save this movie, then the horror scenes will. The horror sequences, especially near the movie's finale, are expertly done and very well filmed. I would believe them to be the best sequences in the movie. They're memorable and very unsettling, both respectable factors for a true horror.

   Memory would probably be the biggest expected disaster that somehow saved itself. It may be preposterous, confusing, and unnecessary at times, but it saves itself by sucking you into the mystery and chilling you with the sequences of horror. Most horror fans may end up despising the movie, but I think it's an underrated gem of modern independent horror.