Creepy and Entertaining

Rating: Null/10 (10 January 2004)

As a little kid, movies like "A Nightmare On Elm Street", "Halloween", and "Friday the 13th" were terrifying pieces of horror sitting in my aunt's den, the VHS cases covered with terrifyingly subtle pictures from the films. I didn't dare watch them, fearing that I would be scared out of my wits for years to come, but the concepts of the movies still somewhat intrigued me, especially that of "A Nightmare On Elm Street."
The story of a disfigured serial killer hunting teenagers in their dreams was a scary yet interesting concept in my mind. Years later, I would find the film playing on a satellite movie channel one late night in December, and I tuned in. I had only planned on catching part of the movie before going off to bed, but I found that I couldn't tear myself away from it. So, I stayed awake until 2:00 in the morning, watching the film's events unfold. I discovered that it was one of the best horror movies I've ever seen. But, enough with the required lengthy introduction to make myself sound superior, onto the review.
Within the past year, I've found myself to be quite a horror fan, something I never knew after avoiding such genre movies like the plague for ages. Truthfully "A Nightmare On Elm Street" is not very scary, albeit very creepy. The film is more of a late night entertainment movie rather than a terrifying horror film. The music is the scariest aspect of the film, particularly the high-key jingle played throughout the movie. Most of the scenes involving Freddy Krueger managed to come across as quite spooky, and the murders were appropriately unsettling. The way the film is laid out -- fast-paced and down to the point -- works perfectly for the story. This kind of movie needs no long-winded buildup.
Acting has often been criticized in horror films, particularly this one. The actress who plays the protagonist, Nancy, doesn't have amazing range, but is effective in the role, as is the woman who plays her mother. I believe that some reviewers need to keep in mind that this is a plot-driven film, not a character-driven one, and the acting does not need to be Oscar material for it to work. And I, for one, am very tired of hearing the phrase "cardboard cut-out characters" used over and over and over again whenever some desperately-needing-to-sound-superior reviewer believes they need to dis acting performances in a smart, Ebert-like way. The point: the acting isn't the issue in this movie.
"A Nightmare On Elm Street" is appropriately horrific and somewhat comedic in a campy yet creepy sort of way for most of the film. The only real problem I had with the movie was the ending. If you don't want to have part of the ending spoiled for you, then skip to the last paragraph now. Freddy loses all of his wits and ghostly powers when Nancy drags him into the real world. She lights him on fire, knocks him down the stairs, and basically kicks his ass. And this is a teenage girl against a psychopathic supernatural murderer hell-bent on revenge. OK, so she had to gain some slasher movie experience and take action against the killer by the ending, but it would have been nice if Freddy had been a little more menacing. This is really my only gripe with the film.
"A Nightmare On Elm Street" is appropriately creepy and a little bit campy at times (although this was probably intentional), and is one horror flick not to be missed. Better than "Friday the 13th", and "Halloween" is next on my list to see.