A Nightmare On Elm Street 2010: Do the nightmares remain?

In 1984 Wes Craven introduced us to a little character named Freddy Kruger, a true boogeyman.  This film introduced us to a new type of slasher featuring one of the scariest villians ever created, pretty much jump started Johnny Depp's acting career and spawned 8 sequels.  This is one of the best horror movies ever made and when I heard that a re-make was being made I was really disappointed as I feared it would suffer the fate of well...all horror remakes and end up being a very shallow blood fest.  So after seeing this just this morning i feel a little torn about it, so I'll take this step by step

Synopsis:  Nightmares have been plaguing the teens of Springwood about a burned man with a knives for fingers (Yes, I'm aware it's a glove bear with me),  When one of their friends Dean kills himself in the middle of a dinner after one such nightmare they find themselves digging up pieces of their own past while trying to survive the horrible Freddy Kruger.

Story:
Although this is in fact a remake of of the first movie and the basis of the story remains the same, alot more things have changed than stayed true.  For instance, several of the characters were replaced in order to appease this generation a little bit more.  One thing that is in fact interesting is we're introduced more to Freddy's backstory, which was a little cliche but in a slasher, no surprise.  There was one BIG difference and that was *SPOILER ALERT* Freddy was not a child murderer in this version he was a child molester. 
One of the worst aspects of this movie were the killings, as in the original they were creative and unique while in this one they seemed a little dry and predictable, so much so that I predicted one of them maybe 10 minutes before it happened.  There were however several referances to the original that were done very creatively 
The twists given were actually pretty well addressed and plot holes were very seldom seen.  Scary wise...not so much in fact I would call this as more of a dark mystery if anything, nothing was truely scary however you will jump once or twice.  STORY OVERALL: 6.5/10

Cast:
Okay, I have to say this, Jackie Earle Hailey was an amazing Freddy Kruger.  Although he's only on screen for about 20 minutes he was definately the star of the entire movie with cruel jokes, an incredibly dark attitude and his normal total diregard for human life.  This Freddy though is much different than the Robert Englund version, he seems to be more interested in actual revenge and inflicting pain than making cheesy jokes; a fine change in my opinion.

That being said the rest of the cast was very forgettable Dean, and Kat (played by Kallan Lutz and Katie Cassidy) were almost text book movie teenagers and paper thin, as well as their acting.  The character jesse (Thomas Dekker) was, for lack of better word, okay with what he had to work with.
 
And of course to fans there's Nancy (Rooney Mara), she was much different and almost unemotional throughout the entire movie.  When it came to about the second half it was like someone turned on her acting switch and she was much better; sadly though that's really all I can say about Nancy she may have been important but she was very boring.

Taking place of johnny depp's character we have a new guy named Quentin (Kyle Gallner) we have an legitamately fine actor.  he gave his all when playing a paranoid insomniac and looked actually scared when it came to Freddy, sadly the only other good actor in this movie aside from Jackie Earle Hailey and Rooney Mara in the second half
CAST OVERALL: 5/10, 8/10 for Jackie specifically

Special Effects/Cinemetography:
Freddy himself looked fairly interesting as he looked like he was really burned rather than a rubber mask.  The only downside to this was that there was sometimes a lack of emotion in facial features but with Freddy, honestly, who cares?  The SE, were used well to give a chilling experience in the dream world and some of the deaths looked a little more realistic,  At the same time they had what I call the "Micheal Bay Syndrome" AKA special effects for the use to simply look cool, such as snowing inside a house etc.

The locations used gave a dreery and depressing experience, giving a sort of hopeless feeling throughout the movie.  That being said the final location was very cheesy, I won't say what it is to spare more spoilers, as it was a generic horror location.  The Boiler Room the teens all eventually visit gave a chilling look, and had a spiders in your veins feeling, especially when Freddy drags his claws across the pipes.
Special Effects/Cinemetography overall: 7.5/10

Script:
I'll make this short and sweet, very cheesy lines, some of which make you roll your eyes.  Freddy had some decent line but still, at the same time the original did, I mean it's a slasher for god sakes
Script overall: 4/10

Scare Factor:
This movie seems to think that no one has ever seen a horror movie before and sticks to the basics.  Such as, See killer, scene pans away, killer is gone, hero thinks thery're safe, and Ahh! killer's right behind you.  Some of the popping up effects can cause some jump factor but it really just relys, again on basics.  Killers saying let's play some games, creepy singing, scary little girlsm and such
Scary? Not quite but it's playful

Final Review:   To say A Nightmare on Elm Street is a bad movie really goes too far, the story may have changed but it sticks to the traditional scares.  The good lies in Freddy himself and the nestagia of seeing a new 80's remake.  The bad lies in most of the cheesy dialogue and scares mixed with some really terrible acting from some of the actors.  But I digress, it's indeed a fun movie and good in far as horror movies.  Is it a gem though?  Sorry fans, far from it but you won't be too disappointed.

OVERALL REVIEW: 7/10