A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
242 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Watchable in a style-before-substance way.
StormSworder19 May 2005
Warning: 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.
8 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
* * out of 4.
brandonsites198130 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.
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
More of A Soap Opera Than Horror.
jmcgee32113 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.
26 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Creepy and Underrated Sequel
Claudio Carvalho30 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")
27 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
What happened?!
Kristine11 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.

50 out of 76 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
children can do anything...
Lee Eisenberg19 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...
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
"Super Freddy" Scene Was Borderlind Unwatchable
forrestwrs12 September 2010
Warning: 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.

6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
And the series gets even worse...
Op_Prime24 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.
22 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Special-Effects Great; Story Stinks
ccthemovieman-19 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.
25 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of the Best of the Series
oh_please16 February 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I think think movie is underrated because the horror is more insidious and psychological rather than blatant gore. Alice Johnson is a strong heroine who picks up where Nancy Thompson was, regrettably, forced to leave off. No one can ever be Nancy, but Lisa Wilcox's Alice is a hallmark of Nancy's greatest attributes yet also manages to be unique and intriguing. The movie is claustrophobic, and by making the struggle between Alice and Freddy internal, it is all the more compelling. Granted, the supporting characters, with the exception of Yvonne, are pedestrian and stereotypical. This is definitely a movie for fans of a determined, ingenious heroine.
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The series sinks a little lower
tex-4212 September 2000
After the success of Part 4, another sequel was a natural move. However they should have stopped it before it began. Alice, having survived Part 4 finds herself pregnant and it seems Freddy is using her unborn child to get at his victims, which of course are Alice's friends. Strange Nightmare movie, very heavy on religious imagery and bad acting. The special effects are good, but the movie itself is not.
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
i don't understand why people like part 4 better?
Lars772426 November 2011
Part four was the brightest and least dark of the whole series. in the dreamchild freddy was darker again and the whole film had a menacing Gothic feel to it. the score was awesome and the atmosphere downright scary to me.

the script is also well written with an in depth story, unlike part 4 that was just thrown together at the last minute.

the ending in part 5 was one of the best of the series as well, with amanda taking freddy back into her womb.

this movie is full of spiritual symbolism as well.

Why do people not like this one? is it because they were simply told not to like it by friends or could it be that many people are too simple minded to enjoy something that has more depth and has a lot of symbolism?

don't get it.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I wasn't disappointed
kurciasbezdalas27 January 2009
Some people complain that they don't like the plot of this movie. Actually I think that it was good enough and the idea that Freddy Krueger is striking through the sleeping mind of Alice's unborn child was pretty clever. OK, some acts of the characters were ridiculous, but I wasn't expecting them to be clever, because I've watched this film only to see some great visuals and murder scenes, so I wasn't disappointed. If you liked previous parts, then you just have to watch this one, because I doubt that by watching these movies you really care about plot. One of the characters is a huge comic-book fan and I think it's pretty predictable what's going to happen to him.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1-2 Freddy's coming for you
Sonya Woods14 February 2002
This was an alright movie. A lot better than the second one. I think it could have been better but it still had Freddy's sense of humor and his evil side and that's all I care about. I like how they continued it from part 4 so people know what is going on. I've seen all the Nightmare On Elm Street movie and love to watch people get butchered up into little pieces.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Average Sequel
The Creeper3 January 2003
This is just an average sequel. Nothing bad, but nothing shockingly good. I would recommend it to Horror fans who want to get a feel of this series. The Black Humor actually works this time (unlike Part 4). A really good installment in the Freddy movies is Part II.

7 out of 10

Fans of horror movies like this should Check out Puppet Master, Skinned Alive, Sleep Away Camp, Slumber Party Massacre, and other Full Moon Pictures flicks. For other recommendations, check out the other comments I have sent in by clicking on my name above this comment section.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A dying effort
PlayerSS29 January 2003
This one is just like the 6th movie. The movie is really bad. It offers nothing in the death department. The one-liners are bad and are something that shouldn't be in a NOES movie. Freddy comes off as a happy child in the whole movie. Lisa Wilcox is still the only thing that makes this one worth while. The characters are extremely underdeveloped. All in all better than the 6th one, but still one the worst movies of the series. My rating 2/10
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Absolutely the worst in the series
horror77777 January 2001
This film is so incredibly bad, that I almost felt sick watching it. Up until this point, the other installments had at least one good thing about it. Part 1 was suspenseful and gory. Part 2 was off beat and entertaining. Part 3 was interesting with great effects. Part 4 had great music, good special effects, and a new entertaining Freddy Krueger. Part 5 is more boring than anything I've ever seen before. Alice, a much prettier blond, from Part 4 is back with her boyfriend Dan. At parts, this supposed Elm Street installment turns into a daytime soap. The newer characters seem harsh, and even that sweet Alice has a chip on her shoulder. Freddy seems to be completely out of this one. He looks tired, and doesn't seem to be as gruesome. His one-liners seem out of place and different, where as in Part 4 they could be pretty funny. Leslie Bohem's story never gets off the ground and Stephen Hopkins' direction is so bad, that it makes my grandmother look good! The whole plot of this movie is ridiculous and unrealistic. It's also confusing and pretty stupid. Avoid Part 5 at all costs!
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Why don't all of you stop saying this movie is bad
Krueger-228 April 1999
This movie was great it wasn't my favorite but I really liked it. you people do not know what you are talking about. Alice returns to kick more Freddy butt and there are some really cool death scenes. Like the motorcycle, the "bonnappetite @#$^&", and the comic book. Those were all great death scenes. if you were a true horror fan like me you would agree.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Routine, by-the-numbers, business as usual
Derek2371 August 2003
When you look back at another bad Nightmare sequel like Freddy's Revenge, you have to at least give it some credit for trying something new. And although The Dream Child is more enjoyable it offers absolutely nothing new to the series. Yes, there's the creative deaths as usual, like a kid becoming part of a comic book and facing "Super Freddy" but even scenes like that aren't used to their full potential and the parts without Freddy are just boring.

This marked the official death of scariness to the series. Freddy seems to be the comedic relief now...but to what?

My Rating: 4/10
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Alice gets Pregnat and Freddy is using her unborn baby's Dream to bring him his victims
aprilthebkb1 October 2006
OK Lets start Alice Johnson is back in A Nightmare on Elm Street 5 this time She has new Friends. Her and her boyfriend Dan from part 4 are doing well until Alice is on her way to work When she goes to a Asylum where Amanda Kruger(Freddy's Mom)was raped and gave birth to Freddy so Alice Enter the Church where she last battle Kruger. So baby Freddy enters the Clothes and Freddy is Reborn. Dan dies on the way to Alice's job because Freddy's back. Alice finds out that She's Pregnant and Freddy is killing people why she is awake and she don't know how he's doing it. News Flash Freddy is using Alice's Unborn baby to bring him his victims instead of using Alice like he did in part 4. Her friends think she's crazy and going nuts. Alice has to try to save her baby from Freddy before it gets out of hand.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Now brace yourselves, Elm Street fans...
skreemr11 July 2006
...and put your pedal to the metal! Alice (Lisa Wilcox) is pregnant and Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) is using her unborn baby as a vehicle to kill her friends Dan (Danny Hassell), Yvonne (Kelly Jo Minter), Greta (Erika Anderson), and Mark (Joe Seeley), and he's taking no chances.

On the unedited, unrated VHS version of the movie, you can see Dan being infused with his motorcycle longer, Greta's insides being fed to her, and Krueger shredding Mark to pieces in the comic book sequence and cutting Mark's paper head off. Of course, I haven't seen the unrated version, just the regular version, and I wonder if I get to rent it one day.

So, feel the need for speed, folks, feel need to speed up your fan time, because "The Dream Child" is coming into your dreams for a fuel-injecting drive.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
this rocks
RESERVOIR SIM30 January 2000
I know a lot of people didn't like this film but I thoroughly enjoyed it. Freddy shows he ain't scared of anything or anybody. The dreams were really cool, especially the comic book one. That guy really thought he could shoot Freddy to death? That guy got his ass kicked. The posh girls dream at the dinner table was pretty disgusting - but still cool! I didn't understand some of it but who cares.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Well... I liked it!
bowmanblue23 June 2014
However, I should warn people that I'm in the minority when it comes to the latter Nightmare on Elm Street movies. The first one was a classic (and pretty scary). However, as the series went on, the main villain (Freddy Kruger) got less and less scary and more and more funny. This turned a lot of people off the franchise, yet I still enjoy it.

If you don't know much about the story then Part 5 is probably an odd place to start. It follows the pretty samey formula of 'dream demon' Freddy Kruger, as he stalks another load of teenagers in their dreams and despatches them in yet more ingenious and gruesome ways.

This time Freddy faces his previous teenage nemesis 'Alice' and her new friends, all of which have a single personality type which Freddy will later use in their worst nightmares.

I would say that if you like horror films in general you'll like this, but it's not very horrific (although the – non CGI – special effects aren't bad here and there. It's no mistake that Robert (Freddy) Englund gets top billing, as he steals every scene. It's more a horror comedy as Freddy delights in spouting of yet more one-liners while he 'works.' If you like your horror 'straight' you may not appreciate this entry. However, if you enjoyed the slightly more 'light-hearted' way Part 4 was done, then you should enjoy this, too.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews