Johnny Depp Movie:

		List Price: $9.98		Label: New Line Home Video Salesrank: 24464 Released: August 22, 2000
		Our Price: $3.42
		Used Price: $1.84
		MPAA Rating: R (Restricted) Media: DVD

Editorial Review:
A child psychologist`s nightmares lead her to the town of Springwood and Freddy Krueger.

Freddy's Dead - The Final Nightmare Reviews:
Joining in with the "this one was too cartoonish" chorus.
2009-11-10 - **Possible spoiler warning, proceed at your own risk**

Full disclosure: I only became a Nightmare On Elm Street fan recently, and I come to it from the Hellraiser fandom; a franchise that has had its own problems during its twenty-year run. And while other people score the second Nightmare On Elm Street film as the weakest in the series, I feel that description unfortunately applies to this one.

Believe me, it's not the fault of the actors here. Robert Englund is always awesome, Lisa Zane acquits herself well here as Maggie, veteran actor Yaphet Kotto turns in a likable performance, and the teen actors are all up to snuff. No, this film is a great example of what can happen when you have great-to-decent actors, and a director and screenwriter who seem to be trying to add to the mythology without taking it or their audience seriously at all. This is especially sad, because this movie could have been so much more than it was, considering what the director and screenwriter had to work with.

Let me clarify: In my experience, any horror movie franchise succeeds or fails on the basis of its mythology. There was already plenty of stuff in Freddy's past to work with, but this storyline could have been a lot more palatable in the right hands. I can see Freddy Kreuger having shown evidence of psychopathic behavior in childhood considering how he was conceived, and it certainly looks as if his origin story as the "Springwood Slasher" presents itself as the "perfect storm" of nature vs nurture (or lacktherof.) But Rachel Talalay camps it up so broadly that the impact of it is lost.

Same with most of the deaths - we get one serious, brutal, oldschool Freddy-style killing with the character Carlos. But then there is the incident with the NES power glove, which I think has gone down as the weakest killing in the entire series. It makes sense; back in 1989/1990, video games were not seen as the valid medium and potential art form as they are today. But it just seems as if the director is mocking Freddy, his victim, and the film's primary viewing audience (teens) all at the same time. Hellraiser had its lowest moment in the fifth installment with the infamous "Kung Fu Cowboys" scene; the Power Glove killing is Nightmare on Elm Street's equivalent.

Freddy has always cracked jokes and twisted teen pop culture into something he can wield back at his chosen victims. This is one of his attractions as a character, going back to the first film. But one of the reasons why this has worked so much better in other films in the series and not in this one is because Freddy's antics are only supposed to be funny to Freddy. I think part of the shock and horror factor of his murderous acts comes from the sheer sadistic amusement that he derives from committing them. In the first five films, we as the audience were able wince at the horrific and ironic nature of the killings (custom-tailored as they were to his individual victims) even as we appreciated Freddy's wit. But the killings in and of themselves are not supposed to be funny, or resemble something out of a Warner Bros. cartoon.

Also not supposed to be funny: an entire town suffering from the loss of its children, to the point of mass catatonia. Yet it was also played for laughs. And don't even get me started on the Dream Demons. As someone who is more used to Clive Barker's mythology and universe, I was expecting something more like the Iad Uroboros, the Big Bads of the from Barker's "Book of Art" series; H.P. Lovecraft-style horrors who thrive on human nightmares and are the reflections of the worst in humanity, who are just waiting to break through from the dream world so that they can consume all of waking creation. Instead, we got cartoonish tapeworm-creatures with adorably high-pitched voices that resembled refugees from a Jim Henson picture. These are supposed to be the things behind Freddy's gory and nightmarish rise to power?

In the late 1990s/early 2000s, Joss Whedon reminded us that it is possible to be clever, witty, and fun with a horror franchise while still respecting both the subject matter and one's target audience, and he did it for seven seasons with the Buffy the Vampire Slayer series. (Come to think of it - I'd suffer almost any privation for a Nightmare On Elm Street movie directed by Joss Whedon.) Wes Craven not only managed it with the first film in the Nightmare franchise, he did it again with the seventh film "New Nightmare," before scoring another hit with the Scream films. Ronnie Yu did it with Freddy vs Jason.

I had to go pop the fourth and fifth Nightmare on Elm Street films (Dream Master and Dream Child) back into the DVD player just to get over the disappointment of this one - which is regrettable, because the mythology of Freddy's daughter and origin deserved so much better than treatment it got in this film.

product review
2009-07-08 - I was pleased with the product I purchased but was completely dissatisfied with the charges that amazon added onto my purchase after I had bought the item

The Worst is Saved for Last
2009-06-08 - I recently re-watched this again, and I have to agree, this was definately the worst of the bunch that I've seen (I haven't yet seen Freddy vs. Jason, so don't know how it would compare). I wouldn't give it 1 star, as I was somewhat entertained, but this was definately below average for so many reasons. One of the reasons I pick on the original was it's idiotic dialogue, (for example, Nancy asking her dad to "arrest" Freddy when she pulls him out of her nightmares), but the dialogue added humor to an otherwise very disturbing tale. Part 6, however, was lacking the chills that made all the other movies that much scarier. The stoner in the video game was interesting, until it showed his "real" body running around the house like a cartoon with those awful sound effects. But what I really found annoying about this movie was the story. Nancy had connections in the first 3 movies (as a character in 1 and 3, and her diary that served as a background in 2). The characters in 3 overlapped into 4, and the characters in 4 overlapped into 5. Amanda became a known character in 3-5. So in a way the stories were all connected. Then comes 6, where the only real connection to the other movies was Freddy. We learn Freddy was married and had a child, none of which was disclosed in any of the other films, that he needs his child to escape the boundaries of Springfield without knowing why, and that one child remains who may or may not be blood-related to Freddy, but where are his parents/adoptive parents? It felt as if they forced a story in order to finish Freddy off, and they didn't bother with trying to find connections to the first movie. Forget all of that, though, what about pulling Freddy out of the dreamworld into reality? What a plot twist!... Oh wait, wasn't that what Nancy tried to do in the first movie? Why didn't it work then? That's the question a lot of people have, and the only thing I can think is that it didn't work for Nancy because it was all a dream (which would seemingly mean she pulled Freddy from one dream into another?). In part 6, we do learn more of Freddy's past, but unless you've watched the other previous movies you don't know why he is what he is, and what led up to his birth in the first place. And the dream demons, while an interesting idea, seemed out of place and not handled very well. I know they are planning to remake the original, and from what I can tell they plan to relaunch it as a franchise. If the directors are listening, my opinion is to make it a trilogy (nothing more than that as it seems that movies tend to die after the 2nd or 3rd installment), and use part 1 as the basis of part 1 remake, part 3 as the basis for the remake sequel, and parts 4 and 5 as the basis for the remake's finale.

FREDDY'S DEAD!?? IF ONLY IT WERE TRUE!
2009-04-14 - I am reviewing the entire Nightmare on Elm Street series, but not this DVD release. I own the box set and I wanted to do individual reviews for each film.

OK, sometimes during a long run of horror franchises, the train derails! This is the case with Freddy's Dead The Final Nightmare. The 3-D gimmick for the last 10 minutes are pretty cool, but not enough to save this so-so entry in the series. The DVD transfer looks good and the 3-D sequence is pretty good for old school 3-D!

The best 3D movie experience for me (the only one to, LOL)
2009-01-07 - In 1991 i would have been only been 8 years old and my older brothers still managed to sneak me in the cinemas, i will never forget this movie experience the staff gave me and everyone 3-D glasses when we sat down.

Fans let me be honest with you about freddy's dead, "ON THE BIG SCREEN THIS MOVIE ROCKS" i thought this was a good sequel it was a better movie then freddy vs jason which i also saw at the cinema's, i didn't like ANOEST.5: the dream child, only because of the fact that i had to always adjust my tv set this movie was to dark and to gothic like for me.

Im a big fan of the original 1984 film. I liked part 2, i thought part 3 was better then part 2, part 4 was ok, part 5 i didn't like and mentioned why, part 6 was good.

However wes craven's new nightmare was pretty ordinary in my eyes, i couldn't work out WHAT WAS REALITY (when nancy was nancy, or when she was acting as a real life person) AND WHAT WAS FANTASY (ie: a dream). This is ANOTHER movie i had to study a few times to get what's going on.