A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child was the worst Freddy Krueger film I've seen yet.
To start off on a good note, though, I liked the cinematography. In fact, I really thoroughly enjoyed the cinematography. It's not often that the cinematography is the best aspect of a picture, but it is here.
The director was weird, though. I mean, I could tell he had a little bit of skill with the regular scenes, but the dream sequences were done incredibly poorly. Usually the best parts of the films, these dream sequences were incredibly poorly conceived. I know that the filmmakers were trying to blend the dreams with reality as in the first film, but they ended up being so goofy that it became entirely too obvious what was a dream and what wasn't. Something else about the dream sequences that bothered me: in the first film Freddy would cut the characters and they would get cut in real life. Whatever happened to that? Instead the dreams just lead to random accidents in real life.
The acting in this movie is even worse than last time. Once again, I liked Lisa Wilcox's pretty face, but her acting is awful. All of them have shitty acting. Even so, the actor who played the character of Mark was interesting. He wasn't very good (though better than the other actors), but he was the only actor who seemed interested in bringing out the more intriguing aspects of his character. These characters aren't much to be interested in. They're dull and not very intelligently designed.
Oh, god, Freddy. What have they done to you? You keep getting more puns put into your dialogue, but now he's being put into bizarre costumes and corny setups. I need to watch the first film again so I can take him seriously again. Robert Englund has even stopped trying, a sign that this series has hit rock bottom. I remember reading that this was Englund's least favorite film. And I can easily see why. The "Super Freddy" scene was borderline unwatchable.
I think the worst part must be the dialogue. This is really among the worst dialogue I've ever heard. I straight up hated the words coming out of the actors' mouths, and I think it was part of the reason the acting itself was so bad. I cannot imagine these lines coming out well. On the other hand, every time the director has regular scenes outside of the dreams, he is able to set up the scenes fairly well. Like I said, he has a bit of skill. Albeit he's not brilliant, but he had potential. Until the dream sequences. But if he had a decent screenplay, his ability might have taken the film somewhere.
Visually, the film isn't even attractive. Apart from the cinematography, there's nothing in the effects or set design that would make this film pleasant to look at. It's just an ugly looking film. I was far more interested in the movement of the camera than the images on the screen.
Yeah, the sh***y effects seal the deal for me. A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child sucks.
1/10
To start off on a good note, though, I liked the cinematography. In fact, I really thoroughly enjoyed the cinematography. It's not often that the cinematography is the best aspect of a picture, but it is here.
The director was weird, though. I mean, I could tell he had a little bit of skill with the regular scenes, but the dream sequences were done incredibly poorly. Usually the best parts of the films, these dream sequences were incredibly poorly conceived. I know that the filmmakers were trying to blend the dreams with reality as in the first film, but they ended up being so goofy that it became entirely too obvious what was a dream and what wasn't. Something else about the dream sequences that bothered me: in the first film Freddy would cut the characters and they would get cut in real life. Whatever happened to that? Instead the dreams just lead to random accidents in real life.
The acting in this movie is even worse than last time. Once again, I liked Lisa Wilcox's pretty face, but her acting is awful. All of them have shitty acting. Even so, the actor who played the character of Mark was interesting. He wasn't very good (though better than the other actors), but he was the only actor who seemed interested in bringing out the more intriguing aspects of his character. These characters aren't much to be interested in. They're dull and not very intelligently designed.
Oh, god, Freddy. What have they done to you? You keep getting more puns put into your dialogue, but now he's being put into bizarre costumes and corny setups. I need to watch the first film again so I can take him seriously again. Robert Englund has even stopped trying, a sign that this series has hit rock bottom. I remember reading that this was Englund's least favorite film. And I can easily see why. The "Super Freddy" scene was borderline unwatchable.
I think the worst part must be the dialogue. This is really among the worst dialogue I've ever heard. I straight up hated the words coming out of the actors' mouths, and I think it was part of the reason the acting itself was so bad. I cannot imagine these lines coming out well. On the other hand, every time the director has regular scenes outside of the dreams, he is able to set up the scenes fairly well. Like I said, he has a bit of skill. Albeit he's not brilliant, but he had potential. Until the dream sequences. But if he had a decent screenplay, his ability might have taken the film somewhere.
Visually, the film isn't even attractive. Apart from the cinematography, there's nothing in the effects or set design that would make this film pleasant to look at. It's just an ugly looking film. I was far more interested in the movement of the camera than the images on the screen.
Yeah, the sh***y effects seal the deal for me. A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child sucks.
1/10