Worst Nightmare Film - By Far


I love most of the series, but this one just totally went off the rails. It's not the slightest bit scary, because there isn't any tension leading up to the Freddy kills. He just pops in and out with ridiculous cheesy lines and kills them in the most asinine and hilarious manner. I found myself laughing for most of it, and cringing at the other half because the dialogue and general feel was just terrible. It has none of the tension and freaky elements that were present in much of the first few. I've re-watched this about 3 times over the years, every time hoping I will find something in it I like, but the more times I watch it, the more I despise it. It is, in my opinion, the worst of the series, and has basically zero redeeming features. The acting is awful, the dialogue is awful, and the effects are particularly awful. I don't even think it deserves to have the series title. Do you think the cast and crew knew how bad it was going to be? I mean, surely when the "comic book" fight happens between Mark and Freddy they had to know how terrible it would be. If I were a part of this I'd probably have stopped several times and asked the director: "Are you for real?" It is classified as a horror and comedy and I can see why. Although, unlike Ed Wood films and many other horror films, it's not so-bad-it's-good, it's just bad.

Anyway, just my thoughts. Feel free to agree or disagree.

reply

I don't think it surpasses part 2 in awfulness, but it sure isn't one of my favorites. Part 2 is just ridiculously dull to me and a real chore to sit through. This one doesn't hold a candle to the original or parts 3 and 4 but I don't think anything in any of the top horror series of the 80s got anywhere near as bad as part 2 of the Elm Street series. It was so bad I'm amazed people actually trusted New Line again and showed up for a third film. Freddy's Dead is also worse than this, I think. Basically I'd place this as the third worse.

reply

Part two is definitely the most boring, I can agree with that. :)

reply

I like part 2. The pacing reminds me of Stephen King's IT and I find the whole premise far less chessy than Dream Warriors. This one though... there's almost nothing to it. Just pointless scene after pointless scene, at least the ones in part 2 are leading somewhere.

reply

I agree. I think this film is quite good, in terms of scenery, quasi-interesting plot and faux-eeriness. But in terms of scariness and plain ahead terror, this one barely rates and is at the very bottom of the series. I'd argue that Freddy is scarier in Freddy's Dead than he is here. I see what they were trying to do here, with the more serious TONE and aesthetic, but the execution fell totally flat.

THE TALK ASYLUM -
Coming in September!

reply

Excellent way of putting it. It was the execution that fell totally flat.

reply

Naah, FINAL NIGHTMARE is worse. This should have ended the series.

reply

I actually admired this film moreso than most other people. True, the storyline and "rules" were out there, but I appreciated the effort to change it up a bit and go for more provocative themes, even when it didn't quite work. The fact that they were mindful enough of the original audience (who were beginning to get older and at the age where they were likely thinking about starting families themselves) also shows to me that this was an honest effort to keep the series "special" for the fans. Even if it didn't work. And I honestly found it to be arguably one of the most visually stunning and well-directed entries in the franchise. The "Death Cycle" (at least in its uncut form) was incredible, and while patchy and weird, the climax was very well constructed.

I think it's a very flawed film, but I appreciate it. And I definitely wouldn't call it the worst in the series by any stretch. I'd take this over the bizarro Freddy's Dead or the dreadful reboot any day of the week.

And FURTHERMORE, this is my signature! SERIOUSLY! Did you think I was still talking about my point?

reply

We can agree on that for sure: I'd definitely say it was better than the reboot. ;)

reply

Very true, haha. The only thing I liked about the reboot was Jackie Earle Haley. I thought he was as good a replacement as was possible. But literally everything else fell apart for me in the reboot.

I wish Christopher Johnson could've gotten the job. (He has a trailer he made for his own reboot concept online. Check it out sometime.) Met him a few times and he's a great guy, and he had some cool ideas for where he wanted to take the reboot.

And FURTHERMORE, this is my signature! SERIOUSLY! Did you think I was still talking about my point?

reply

Yeah, Haley is a great actor. The problems were legion though. Bad script, bad casting, etc. etc.

I'll have to check out that Johnson trailer, thanks for the tip. ;)

reply

But part 6 is by far the worst!? I didn't like this one, but to say that it's the worst is wrong imo. Part 6 is so cartoonishly horrible and weird.. Freddy is like Wile E. Coyote and the deaths are so bland. (Dropping pins down and scratching on chalkboard? The NES game?) the whole thing is a mess..

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Yes, you're right, those were certainly some of the better aspects of it. The tone was cool for sure.

reply

By far the biggest problem for me is reintroducing Amanda Krueger and her saying her body needed to be found to defeat Freddy when she never mentioned a damn thing about it in part 3. That seems like something she would have mentioned. I can handle continuity problems, but no shoehorning in past elements like that.


Haters gonna hate

reply

Ahh yes, very good point! I never even thought of that. Good job noticing that. guess I need to watch them in a row or something, because I missed that one.

reply

The worst is Freddy vs. Jason, the cast is horrendous in that and Jason is a complete goober.

reply