The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

The spectre of a dead child rapist haunts the children of the parents who murdered him, stalking and killing them in their dreams. Jackie Earle Harley is great as Freddy Krueger despite the terrible make up that was used on his face and his more serious perfomance as Freddy even tho it's nowhere near as good as Robert's is still really good. The rest of the cast with the exception of Kyle Gallner was a mixed back especially Mara's and Cassidy's as for Dekker and Lutz? Their perfomances were Terrible. The film has some nice scares and a nice origin for Krueger's twisted past but it's also a remake with some terrible over the top kills (like the Ending) and some awful cgi (like the one with the wall). Overall it's better than most of the previous films but it's nowhere near as good as the first or Dream Warriors and New Nightmare. (5.5/10)

Tell me something. What was so great about the originals? Is it the acting? No. The acting is terrible. The effects? Maybe. I'm sure they were awesome for their time. Robert Englund? Again, maybe. He really seemed to be into his part. Johnny Depp? ...No. The fact that Freddy kills a total of three people? One of which was barely on screen? No. That sucks.Ok, maybe I'm being a bit harsh. The effects even today aren't that bad. And the two kills that weren't painstakingly slow and boring were actually pretty awesome. And Johnny Depp's death was iconic. But I was never a fan of the original movies. The acting always made me cringe, the sound effects were goofy, and Freddy was always... well... goofy. I get that he likes to play with his victims, but he's supposed to be scary. Terrifying. But most of the time, I just cringed or laughed when I saw him.This movie, on the other hand, takes all of that out and remakes the original movie with some better characters and a better Freddy. Granted, I know Robert is iconic as Freddy and me saying anyone else is better than him is probably blasphemy to the name of horror as a whole, but I don't care. The only Robert Englund Freddy I liked was in Freddy vs Jason. And even then, he was STILL really goofy and weird. I like Jackie Earle Haley better as Freddy. He was more terrifying, more clever, and was able to have fun and laugh without being over the top or goofy. It even remade some of the iconic scenes while introducing new ones. Like the Nancy in the tub with Freddy's hand scene, Kris' death, the body bag scene, Freddy in the walls, and Nancy's mom getting attacked at the end... Ok, so they weren't very original in that regard. But what do you expect from a remake? They probably just wanted to trigger fans' nostalgia. ...That... words. Anyway, they do some new stuff, too. Like the way they get rid of him. ...For a day or so. In the original, Nancy reads a book on traps, sets them up around the house, then goes to sleep. All in the span of, what an HOUR?? That's not even possible. And on top of that, when Freddy's finally out and ready to kill her, she beats him with what? Willpower. She does NOTHING but say that he can't hurt her. And he just vanishes. BORING. The remake has them go to the school. It's this whole thing about Freddy being accused by the kids of hurting them and taking them to his basement, then he gets killed by the parents, kills some of the kids years later after they've forgotten about the whole thing and leading Nancy and Quentin to the pre-school all of this took place in so they can remember, only for them to realize they were telling the truth about it and going to drag him out of their dreams and fight him two on one with a broken paper slicer... thing. And you know what? It's WAY more interesting and believable than anything in the original.

This is the weakest remake from Platinum Dunes and I can't belive I use to like this movie. The script is terible and the story is trash including the plot and characters. Nancy in this movie is so bland! I understand the actress doesn't like the experience of being in this movie and I be the same too. At least it's better than Freddy's Dead: Final Nightmare (1991). Freddy in this movie look like a fish if you ask me, the make-up for Freddy is bad! I do like Jakie Earl Haley in this movie, his character is well written but he'll never be good as Robert Egland like Thomas Jane will always be the Punisher. This movie is bad but at least they tried. So this is my review on A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010), I don't recommend it at all.Score: 3.5/10

Visually, it's faithful to the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" movie. But, it's just that there isn't enough of the campy charm that made the original so great. No offense to Jackie Earl Haley. He's okay, but....I'd say Robert Englund is and will always be the true face of Freddy Kruger. Now Rooney Mara, I actually don't mind. But, Heather Langenkamp has always been the face of Nancy Thompson for over 30 years and she's still an iconic figure to this day. The effects of the movie are okay, but I don't think they were strong enough to save this movie remake from being so dull, story-wise.Overall, I would say that you should just stick with the original version of "A Nightmare on Elm Street" because it's a lot more suspenseful than the remake.6 out of 10.