Micransix Crappy film

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Cristal The movie really just wants to entertain people.

paulclaassen Freddie is back, but wants to use a teenager's body to kill for him. Why? This does not make sense, as Freddie is a killer in his own right, having his vengeance on the Elm Street parents who burnt him alive. What does he have to gain by using a teenager's body? Excellent effects and still entertaining, though. The party scene was great!

TheLittleSongbird The original 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' is still to me one of the scariest and best horror films there is, as well as a truly great film in its own right and introduced us to one of the genre's most iconic villains in Freddy Krueger. It is always difficult to do a sequel that lives up to a film as good as 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' let alone one to be on the same level.'A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge' is not to me the dreadful film as reputed, but, while its attempts to do something different is admirable, it should have been much better than it turned out to be. It is very difficult to not feel disappointed when you inevitably compare 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' to its first sequel and find that the drop in quality is so significant and hard to ignore. Whether 'Freddy's Revenge' is the worst of the series is debatable, to me and many others it is one of the weaker ones. 'Freddy's Revenge' is not a complete waste of time. It starts off very promisingly, with the bus scene is thrillingly unsettling. Easily the film's scariest moment and the scene one remembers the most. Robert Englund is still very freaky and shows why Freddy is so iconic as a villain, he may not be quite as terrifying but the material isn't as strong here and he is still highly effective. It's not a bad-looking film, there is a slickness to it and there are some nightmarish effects. There are some eerie moments, though none of the rest of the film lives up to the bus scene, and some amusing dark humour. The music is suitably haunting.However, there are also a fair share of problems. The scares don't come enough, and while there are effective ones there are also just as many that are perfunctory and pretty tame by 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' series standards. Credit is due for trying to do something different and there are parts that do intrigue. A tighter pace and less pedestrian direction would have made the execution better, as well as trying to do less and focus more on the quality of the scares and how the story is told.Jesse is such a dull damp squib of a character who lacks a quick-thinking or logical brain let alone any kind of presence. The one-note expressionless acting of Mark Patton accentuates this. The rest of the cast are nowhere near as bad, but when it comes to the acting the only one to properly rise above the material is Englund. Lastly, the ending is a slap in the face and really undoes Freddy's character, he would never do what he does at the end and it doesn't make sense for him to do it.Overall, not that bad but could have been much better. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Foreverisacastironmess Ok so for a start, I honestly never quite registered the big infamous gay undertones of this much-maligned sequel that everyone raves about so much until I heard it pointed out in some documentary or whatever, and I certainly never noticed it as a kid, I just thought it was a bit of a lame sequel that just happened to feature some very random s**t in it! That element of the movie has really been blown out of proportion, people make out that every little scene is a homoerotic metaphor of some kind, someone even suggested that of the unbelievably stupid scene where the parakeet goes crazy and attacks the cast before exploding like a Roman candle in a flurry of fire and pretty feathers! To me it's not at all that it's 'gay' that's the problem, but that it's so obnoxiously out of place, awkward and plain ridiculous to have that kind of thing stamped all over the sequel to what had been such an acclaimed and instant classic. And how it's done in this is so tacky and in the more blatant moments that everyone knows about it's right in your face, "subtext" my ass! It might have earned itself a little more consideration and respect over the years and I can understand why, it is a fun and entertaining campy effort in its own right, it's pure 80s and has an effective eerie score as well as still retaining the darker more menacing Freddy who talks little and sticks more to the shadows before he naturally progressed into the macabre crooked clown pop culture horror icon we all know and love, but at the end of the day make no mistake, this was never a worthy follow up to the masterful original and failed to live up to its premise and was a big 'ol step down in basic quality on pretty much every level... From my point of view it's not a bad movie, but it sure ain't a good Nightmare on Elm Street movie! For one thing it's fundamentally a story about possession, not nightmares, and barely touches upon the dream and die aspect that was so incredibly well realised in the first movie, and that was especially irksome. If Jessie sleeps people other than him die but that's as far as it goes.. It's the sequel that quite literally took the Nightmare out of Elm Street! To be totally fair though they couldn't have known about the lore that would come about with the later films in the series, but couldn't they have thought it through a little more and followed on the first movie's events just a little and done it so that, maybe with his presence still very weak after his defeat by Nancy, Freddy was using Jessie to spread new fear to the children of Elm Street so that he'd be strong enough to be able to terrorise and kill his victims in their dreams again? As it is the tone is patchy and has no real atmosphere at all.. It has its good points and moments, it gets off on the right foot with the regular bus ride turning into a trip straight to hell, with the bus precariously hanging above a flaming abyss on crumbling rocks. That a creepy memorable sequence and a high note to me and the effects are impressive, as are the ones done in the also memorable scene where Freddy bursts out of Jessie's body like out of a cocoon, it's very well done and is a little reminiscent of David's transformation into a werewolf in a certain classic! I like the few scenes in the old abandoned steelworks factory, it's a spooky old joint and it makes sense that a corporeal Freddy would return to haunt his old lair.. The silly monster animals might not seem to make sense but maybe it's Freddy's unearthly influence starting to manifest itself? One thing the movie has in its corner is that it has Clu Gulagger in it, who is hilarious as a moronically skeptical old-timey father! Mark Patton is so lame and annoying in it however, he's just a whiny male waif who's essentially filling a girl's role, I mean how could the audience possibly take him seriously after he lets loose such a cringeworthy girlish shriek after the opening nightmare? Jessie is a helpless idiot, it's the girl who saves him in the end after solving the mystery for him - it might be the only flick in the series with a male lead but it doesn't count for very much, when push comes to shove it's still a woman that beats Freddy, with a kiss nonetheless! Jessie is baptised and born anew by the power of her pure love and his inner lurking evil of corruption is banished, but it's only a matter of time before the symbolism strikes again!! As much as this film leans toward the sucky side of things it could have easily been a lot worse if the execs hadn't come to their senses and used Robert Englund in the role he was born to play a second time after a failed screen test. And for what it's worth, like Friday the 13th A Mew Beginning, if at least offered a novel approach to a beloved horror character and an interesting chapter in am awesome series. Not nearly as good as the original but not as bad as some make it out to be. A solid 7 out of 10 Fu Man Chew Fingers! X

jordansepticeye This movie was just okay,not great,not bad.First,the pros,the beginning,it was suspenseful and very creative.I like the fact that they tried to be different with the gay undertones,it really sets the film apart from the other sequels,and makes the main character more interesting.All of the stupid moments give the film a "so bad it's good" feeling,and make it highly entertaining.The characters are decently developed,the main character,played by Mark Patton is especially well acted.I thought the story was decent,there were some cool scenes and the effects were good.The best thing though,Robert Englund,he is still very dark and sinister.Now,the cons,I felt that the ending was very generic,and anticlimactic.The scares,they were very stupid and ridiculous(but hilarious).I feel like there wasn't enough kills or Freddy,in the first movie,it didn't matter,but here,it did.The worst part though,the tone,it tries to be serious at times,but the movie feels like an 80s sitcom.Nightmare 2 is better than others in the franchise,but not the best.