A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child More at IMDbPro »A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child (original title)

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 24:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 232 reviews in total 

48 out of 73 people found the following review useful:

What happened?!

Author: Kristine (kristinedrama14@msn.com) from Chicago, Illinois
11 November 2003

A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child, the fifth installment in the Nightmare on Elm Street series and the worst sequel ever in the series, even worse than A Nightmare on Elm Street 2. I was lucky enough to get the Nightmare on Elm Street DVD box set for my birthday and I watched all the sequels. The dream child was the worst without a doubt, I was surprised too since they were doing so well with the last two sequels. But I guess they just lost the charm, the story was just ridicules and I wasn't happy with where it went. Alice just became more annoying, she's not Nancy or Kirsten, so her carrying this film on her own didn't work for me. Freddy is also loosing his scare, this was just getting a bit silly.

Alice is back and she's carrying a child, she couldn't be happier with her life. But Freddy is also back and he's not going to be too light on her since she defeated him so easily in the fourth movie. But anyways, he wants her child and to be born into the world again. Did you ever wonder if Freddy had parents too? Well that's what A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child investigates and Alice soon finds out what Freddy's childhood was like and that maybe that's the one thing that can defeat him.

A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child is just all in all a bad movie and an insult to the series. I don't think anyone could be happy with this sequel. Just the story was really silly, I mean it could have possibly worked, but once again, it was just executed the wrong way. I know that if you're looking to see the sequels for the Nightmare on Elm Street series, you should watch it, but I really wouldn't recommend it, it's not worth it, at least in my opinion.


Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

More of A Soap Opera Than Horror.

Author: jmcgee321 from United States
13 April 2005

Not saying this is a bad movie like most people say, but if you look at it real closely; you will see this installment has the most drama than the others. Besides PART 7. Director Stephen Hopkins and (female) writer Leslie Bohem provide a great dramatic story with perfect comic timing by FREDDY KRUGER(Robert Englund).

Alice(Lisa Wilcox) and Dan(Danny Hassell) have been living like king and queen since the battle with FREDDY. All of that is about to change, because FREDDY is using their unborn baby, Jacob(Whitby Hertford), dreams to kill those close to her. The only person who can help her is the rest of her remaining friends and FREDDY's mother, who body has been missing since the birth of FREDDY.

Now the plot sounds like an average horror movie, but it's not. What most people complain about is how slow moving it is and not few people are killed like the other installment. This movie not about that at all, it's more on the human side than horror. Of course, you have those excellent one liners from FREDDY. So watch if your in for a horror/drama.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Creepy and Underrated Sequel

Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
30 March 2009

On the day of her graduation in Springwood High School and after having sex with her boyfriend Dan Jordan (Danny Hassle), Alice Johnson (Lisa Wilcox) has a dreadful nightmare with Amanda Krueger (Beatrice Boepple) on the night that she was mistakenly locked up in the asylum with one hundred maniacs and then with Freddy Krueger's rebirth. During the night, while Dan is in the graduation party in a swimming pool with their common friends Yvonne (Kelly Jo Minter), Mark Grey (Joe Seely) and Greta Gibson (Erika Anderson), Alice calls him and Dan leaves the party and drives his truck to meet Alice at her job. However he is attacked by Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) and crashes against a large truck instantaneously dying. The shocked Alice goes to the hospital and finds that she is pregnant of Dan's son. When Greta is killed by Freddy during a dinner party, Alice becomes intrigued since she was not sleeping in both occasions; therefore Freddy could not have used her dreams to reach Dan and Greta. Sooner Alice concludes that Freddy is using her baby's dreams to kill her friends, and she decides to seek out Amanda to learn how she could defeat and destroy Freddy Krueger.

"A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child" is the fifth part of this classic movie and is a creepy and underrated sequel. This is the movie of the franchise that uses the greatest number of impressive gruesome special effects. The deaths are very creative, like the one in the comic book or the attack of the motorcycle and one of the scariest scenes is when Alice is dressed like Amanda and surrounded by the crazy guys in the saloon of the mental institution. The beauty of Lisa Wilcox gives a great contrast with the ugliness of the beast Freddy Krueger. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "A Hora do Pesadelo 5: O Maior Horror de Freddy" ("The Hour of the Nightmare 5: The Greatest Horror of Freddy")

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

* * out of 4.

Author: Brandon L. Sites (brandonsites1981@yahoo.com) from USA
30 May 2002

Never mind Freddy's return is never explained, this installment has terrific effects, and style to burn with Robert Englund giving it his all, but this series is getting old fast. In this entry, Freddy (Englund) is trying to control the unborn child of part four's survivor and murdering all her friends in the process. The black and white sequence is a highlight. Unrated; Extreme Graphic Violence, Sexual Situations, Profanity, and Brief Nudity.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

And the series gets even worse...

Author: Op_Prime from Ardmore, PA
24 January 2002

The series began suffering with the fourth movie, but this one really sent the series down hill. The acting is horrible. Only Robert Englund delivers a good performance. Not easy considering how pathetic this movie makes Freddy. Instead of the dark and scary villain, he's become a wise cracking jerk. The story is poor, making little sense. More details about Freddy's past come to light, but it really doesn't make a difference. The movie is also not very scary. The makers of this movie just opt for a lot of gore. The special effects try to fix the movie's many problems, but they don't. You'd think they would know when to quit, but yet another sequel followed. Thumbs down on this one.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Watchable in a style-before-substance way.

Author: StormSworder from United Kingdom
19 May 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Freddy, who survived being destroyed be the 'dream master', is now attempting to be reborn through the dreams of Alice's as-yet unborn baby. Alice starts having nightmares concerning Freddy's mother, his place of conception and what he looked like before he was cremated by avenging parents.

The '5' I have given this film is only so high because of the dark, imaginative special effects, the atmospheric soundtrack and because of Robert England who is at his wisecracking best (even though the comic-book portrayal of Freddy leaves the film abut as scary as an episode of Postman Pat. Everything else about this film stinks, from the lousy, couldn't-care-less acting to the often tedious storyline and the irritating characters. Reviews at the time of this film's release claimed you needed an IQ of less than 20 to enjoy it. Perhaps they were being generous.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 43 people found the following review useful:

Special-Effects Great; Story Stinks

Author: ccthemovieman-1 from United States
9 April 2006

Some of the best, if not the best, special effects in the seven-part "Nightmare On Elm Street" series were featured in this movie. They are good and they are clever.

The teens in here are still annoying and profane but not to the degree they are in most of the "Freddy" films. There are some real "hotties" in here, too. The ridiculous part is that all these "teens" look about 25 years old (which they probably are). Robert Englund (Freddy) has some funny lines, as he did in a most of these movies and the movie is well-photographed.

My problem with the story, and almost of them actually, is the theology which has always been so stupid, but I tolerated it through all of the films. But here, to a show a book in the beginning of the film that says "Christian Mythology," is a real cheap shot and going too far. This pagan propaganda was heavy in this film, which is really only worthwhile for the inventive special-effects.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Freddy a father? Sure, why not?

Author: sgtking from United States
6 July 2013

By 1988, it seemed that audiences couldn't get enough of Freddy Krueger. The first three films made a lot of money, which led to merchandising up the wazoo. He was a household name and it was only the beginning. 'The Dream Master' was the most successful of the series up to that point. So naturally the folks at New Line got started on the next chapter. It came less than a year after 4 and didn't perform as well as what came before. All these years later though, it actually holds up well.

Pros: A great and creepy opening sequence. Above average performances. One of the best scores in the series. A welcome return to a darker atmosphere. Nicely done effects. Eye-popping production design. Creative death scenes. Some cool ideas, such as how Freddy gets to his victims this time. Moves at a good pace.

Cons: Like the last film, this one's plot is real thin. Brings up some serious issues, then drops them. Though shown less, Freddy isn't as scary as in the earlier films.

Final thoughts: Like 'Halloween 5,' this sequel was rushed into production after it's predecessor's success. Had they given the audience a longer break from Ol' Freddy, it may have done better at the Box Office. Despite this and it's faults, this installment is one of the series' strongest. From the spectacle, to the likable cast, to the darker tone and the chilling score it's a treat. Too bad they had to blow it with the next one, but that's another story.

My rating: 4/5

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

"Super Freddy" Scene Was Borderlind Unwatchable

Author: forrestwrs from United States
12 September 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

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.


Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

children can do anything...

Author: Lee Eisenberg (lee.eisenberg.pdx@gmail.com) from Portland, Oregon, USA
19 April 2006

Obviously, they wanted to have Freddy come back yet again. This time, he murders people through the dreams of an unborn baby. You read that right: AN UNBORN BABY! I never knew that unborn babies can dream, but apparently they can. As for the murders themselves...well, let's just say that the doll scene was something else! I would imagine that Robert Englund is probably proud to be remembered as that claw-handed slasher. Granted "A Nightmare On Elm Street: The Dream Child" isn't exactly the most creative movie ever, but it's still neat for what it is. Needless to say, there are some silly one-liners. And yet, there were even sequels after this one...

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 24:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history