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 guidemessage board
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 9 of 24: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [Next]
Index 231 reviews in total 

Stomach-churning, but other than that, good.

Author: solidgameboy12-1 from Troy, Montana
3 August 2004

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


The film follows the character Alice, who is bothered by Freddy, and has frightening dreams revolving around Freddy's Birth.

Soon after, She finds out that in order to kill Freddy for 'good', She has to find the power within herself. However, around that time, Alice has given birth to a child, she sees the boy in her dreams, who is named Jacob, Alice soon finds that Freddy has become a second father for Jacob, and fills him with hateful feelings, and wants Jacob to become the dream child.

Without giving much away, you learn about more things in the film that make you scratch your head, if you have a strong stomach, and are more than willing to sit through it, than take a chance.

Was the above review useful to you?

Hi, Alice. Want to make babies?

Author: Ii_fut_in_gura_pe_stelisti
11 June 2004

IMDb mark: 7

Five, six; grab your crucifix. I initially hoped to incorporate that into the title of this review. Remember, in part 1, how Nancy was able to sleep well when she was holding the crucifix? And also how, as soon as she put it back in its place, Freddy stopped creeping through the wall? I guess the makers of the Nightmare on Elm Street sequels missed out on any potential a crucifix might have had. Anyway... This installment gives the viewers more insight on Freddy's origin and expands his story on a whole new level.

-Gore: This film is not gorier than any of the predecessors. May be even less gory, actually... despite the nice bike scene in the beginning, with its Spawn-like charm. 25/30

-Suspense: It comes pretty close to the original. 'A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child' is fast-paced, you never know what's going to happen, and the sound is really eerie. 15/15

-Ending: The ending was cool, but not great. Of course, taste varies. 9/15

-Death Scenes: This is probably the worst aspect of the fifth Nightmare on Elm Street. Just 3 deaths in this one; even the first movie had more, and those were far better done. The best murder here is Dan's, clearly. 5/11

-Atmosphere: Now, this is great. The locations are unreal, spooky and well-suited for each and every scene, in my opinion. You can swear the asylum is taken from Tim Burton's films, or perhaps Harry Potter's world, whichever one you're more familiar with. Just like with the first one, I never thought about anything from the outside world while watching this Nightmare on Elm Street; that's a big plus, naturally. 10/10

-Nudity: Alice is, apparently, nude in the shower at the beginning of the movie. 2/10

-Cast: Again, besides Robert Englund, there are no other famous actors here. Lisa Wilcox, who reprises her role from part 4, and Erika Anderson, the best-known of the rest of the cast, never quite made it big. 2/5

-Genre: This is a horror film. 4/4

-->Overall: 72/100

I had seen this movie a couple of times before, but I was pleasantly surprised when I watched it this last time. Although the cast is not star-studded, the make-up may not be top-notch and the acting is probably so-and-so, 'A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Child' is the second most suspenseful film in the series. And we all know scary movies are rare. From Swordlord, 2 swords up!

Was the above review useful to you?

I Fell Asleep Because Freddy Didn't Get Me

Author: DeadSkinMask
3 May 2004

I rented this movie because I saw the trailer for it on this site. As soon as Freddy says, "It's a BOY!!!" I thought this was going to be a wicked contribution to this franchise. Boy was I wrong.

Robert Englund is cool as always but this movie doesn't give him much to do and it's actually surprising how little Freddy is seen in a movie about that character.

The premise of this movie is actually interesting but it is executed poorly. Plot points are brought up for discussion by the teen characters way later than they should have been. The mindset of any good slasher movie is to NEVER let the audience know more than the characters in the movie because once the audience has a complete grasp of what's happening and what's going to happen, they check out. At least I do, which is why I fell asleep.

From a technical standpoint there are some cool visuals and a few decent sets but everything gets a bit too cartoony for my tastes. I understand that it's a dream world and in that respect nothing is off-limits but I just lost interest in it. The heavily tilted camera angles were the main problem with the dream world for me.

My favorite line in the movie is said by the gloved killer Krueger, "Where you going piglet?" The answer to that is out to get a better movie.

Ultimately this picture is boring and quite pedestrian. I am a fan of these flicks but I was seriously disappointed by this fifth installment. There are better volumes in this series and I suggest you see one of those.

Was the above review useful to you?

Passable sequel *spoilers*

Author: Andy (Incubus_Reborn) from Maine
17 March 2004

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well, Freddy returns just a year after "The Dream Master" and this time he is using Alice's (Lisa Wilcox, from the previous film) unborn baby to be resurrected again. Alice wises up to this and faces not only Freddy, but the challenges of motherhood. Overall, "The Dream Child" isn't as bad as it's reputation. As the fifth in the series, it fares pretty well. Director Stephen Hopkins ("Predator 2") gives us plenty of eye candy (I especially loved the upside-down diner shot) and the visual effects are stunning, even if the gore is bit restrained. Robert Englund returns as Freddy, but this is one of his worst performances. Freddy is used very minimally, and when he does appear, he is making jokes (I guess that's the writer's fault, not Robert's). I have a hard time imagining anyone being afraid of Freddy in this one. I really don't like the direction they pushed Freddy into in this one (which just further continued in "Freddy's Dead") and I resent how we were supposed to laugh at the deaths of characters we have grown to care about, for example Dan and the motorcycle fusion (which was interesting and gruesome in it's own right). The gore is a little restrained, just as all late-80's movies are (the unrated version is nearly impossible to find) and the film feels like it was chopped up and dissected too many times. Following up four other superb movies (in my opinion), this one is a minor disappointment.


Was the above review useful to you?

Not the best, but a good movie

Author: (wlytinia@aol.com) from Wadesboro North Carolina
16 February 2004

Ill admit this isnt the best Freddy movie but its suspenseful and has a few good qualitys. For one it picks up where part 4 left of unlike some sequals that dont follow up on the one before. A couple of familiar characters from part 4 are also in this one. The death scenes are innovative. One negative thing sort of about this movie is the ending, but this movie is followed by a part 6 so it dosent totally leave you hanging. This movie is worth watching.

Was the above review useful to you?


Author: jmcgee-1 from united states
24 December 2003

It has been a year again.And FREDDY has tone down on killing and more on jokes.But this Nightmare is based on drama mode than horror.So it gets slim for a FREDDY fan.

The DREAM MASTER,Alice,has stopped FREDDY in his own turf and lives happy ever after with Dan,her boyfriend.But all this is about to change,because FREDDY's back and he's using the dreams of Alice's unborn baby to kill again.Not only must Alice fight FREDDY,but also coupe with the idea of being a mother.FREDDY's mom also decides to help Alice and her friends.

This Nightmare theme wasn't horror as you think,since only 3 people die,but on drama.Showing us more of the human side to the nightmare series.Stephen Hopkins(Lost in Space,Predator 2,Traffic:The Miniseries)is an alright director,but should of made this one more scary.

Was the above review useful to you?

In one word : mediocre

Author: timefreezer7 from Greece
9 December 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The fifth chapter in the popular horror saga is one of the weakest entries of the series, but not a bad little movie at all. The producers fortunately decided to return the series to its dark roots after the rollercoaster ride of the video gamish Part IV. Although the effort was nice, neither the script nor the direction managed to accomplish fully successful results. The result was quite mediocre but at least this film had a plot (in contrast to The Dream Master) and made an attempt of portraying a nightmarish world with dark gothic scenery.

We knew it would happen: after the financial success of Part IV the sequel was inevitable. Picking up where we left off, one year after the events of the Dream Master, Alice (Lisa Wilcox) starts having bad dreams once again. Her life will soon change drastically when first she learns that her boyfriend has rendered her pregnant and she then witnesses, in a peculiar day-dream/vision, the horrific rebirth/resurrection of the notorious boogeyman called Freddy Krueger. It seems that Freddy simply can't be put to rest. However, I am compelled to acknowledge the fact that the explanation given by the scriptwriters is logical, decent and passable instead of having a dog urinating fire on Krueger's bones. So after Krueger is resurrected he begins his reign of terror once again by intimidating Alice and invading the dreams of her friends dispatching them one by one.

There are some interesting plot elements in this one but I don't want to give away spoilers. I will say however that the storyline continues the revelations given in Part III about Krueger's past. The gothic dream sequences where Alice infiltrated the mental asylum are some of the best ones in the entire film. Speaking of Alice, Lisa Wilcox is a much better actress here, portraying Alice perfectly as a dynamic and powerful heroine who struggles to save herself and her unborn child, while in the last film she seemed out of place. The cinematography is good, some of the SFX are great (the comic book sequence comes to mind) the supporting actors give solid performances. The death scenes are quite cool, do not disappoint and will please both the Elm Street and the gore fans in general. The characters are likeable enough to root for them. My personal favorite was Mark, the comic book freak.

Unfortunately the liabilities are quite as many . First, the script can't do anything to hide the fate of the supporting cast. From the first moment you see Alice's friends you can watch the stamped label on their foreheads writing "CANNON FODDER" with huge neon lights. Secondly some of the scenes lack the tension they should have due to Stephen Hopkins' lame direction (like the rebirth scene). The visions Alice has of her 8 year old son Jacob is a quite cliched and stupid idea which doesn't seem to lead anywhere . On the contrary, the visions of Amanda Krueger was a strong plot device which helped the film. One of the worst aspects of the film, which is especially damaging, is Robert Englund as Krueger. Not only has he little screen time but he gives his worst performance in the entire series. Englund is quite bored and tired here, sleepwalking through his role. Rumors have it that he had signed a two movies contract in Part IV and it shows!! Finally the ending sequence which can't deliver what the writers envisioned. Not only does it seem suspiciously "inspired" by Labyrinth (1986) with the Escher-esque scenery, but it lacks the power it should have. The ending leaves you wanting more of Freddy and a more satisfying resolution. Fortunately Part VI, which followed, accomplished all these tasks perfectly.

Worth noting is the fact that the script was written in an era where the media had made a great fuss about abortions, so the social allegories the film tries to pull are vociferous . Unfortunately these subjects are quite dated by now so the film once again loses points in impact. Overall, Part V is a mixed bag. It may disappoint many of you while others may be thrilled. I believe that although it is not worth all of the money you will give to rent it and you may not lose much if you miss it, on the other hand you can take a look at a couple of satisfactory scenes not to mention you may find out if Alice will eventually survive from the clutches of her dream stalker. A mediocre entry but at least an entertaining, cute try from the producers.

Nightmare on Elm Street V : The Dream Child - 6 / 10

Was the above review useful to you?

"It's a boy!!"

Author: Backlash007 from Kentucky
28 September 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***


I'm going to say good things about A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child because it's more than a few steps up from Nightmare 4. Part 4 is nothing more than a by-the-numbers slasher film. This one, however, actually has a rich storyline. And Stephen Hopkins knows how to direct a horror movie. It picks up where 4 ended with the Alice and Dan characters about to graduate. Freddy is back somehow; he's lurking in the shadows and killing off Alice's friends...while she's awake. He's able to do this because of her unborn child, asleep in the womb, and dreaming. This is a far better plot device than any of the previous Nightmare sequels. It still has a touch of corniness but it doesn't ruin the film. It's still a Part 5 though so unless you're a fan of the series I wouldn't worry about missing it.

"Faster than a b**tard maniac, more powerful than a local madman...it's Super-Freddy!!"

Was the above review useful to you?

A good time at the movies will be had

Author: chris (christophaskell@hotmail.com) from Premiere Video (Dallas, Tx)
20 September 2003

Freddy and friends are back in this, the fifth edition to the Krueger series. Alice (Lisa Wilcox again) returns from the fourth film and begins having strange dreams again, this time about Freddy's mother, Amanda Krueger. Freddy reappears as well, and very quickly starts stirring up trouble in Springwood. Plot wise there was nothing surprising in this installment, a few kids die and a few survive. The fifth Krueger, however, is my favorite one. It has a lot of energy, some really funny moments (in that campy, B-movie sense), and I think Hopkins completely understood that making a fifth movie was a terrible idea. He allows himself to have fun with this movie, throwing in creative inventions like baby Krueger, while simultaneously expounding on Freddy's sordid past, and the past of his mother. Those of you who want Freddy to remain a terror stay away from this film, as there's nothing ‘scary' here. To everybody else I say check it out; you never know, you might learn something. Rating: 28/40

Was the above review useful to you?


Author: (michapringle@yahoo.com) from Vancouver, Canada
14 September 2003

I watched the first Nightmare on Elm Street when it came out and it scared the crud out of me. 15 Years later it wasn't the same experience. Recently, I have been watching the sequels to A Nightmare on Elm street. The sequels are terrible. Out of all the sequels up to the 6th, only the 3rd is watchable.

This movie was particularily lousy. I agree with comments from others who have summarized this movie - Freddy has been turned into a wisecracking nitwit. These movies are a waste of time. I hear the 7th one is decent.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 9 of 24: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [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