Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)


The challenge of the Nightmare on Elm Street films is that they need to create fear in an environment where the normal rules don’t apply, which makes scares that would be shocking in a realistic context less effective. The second sequel answers this challenge by not trying to be a horror film; it’s more of a supernatural thriller, set in a psychiatric ward populated by tormented teenagers.

It’s structured like a mystery, where the doctors and patients alike try to work out what’s causing the recent spate of suicides (Freddy Krueger, duh) and how to stop them. The solution is ultimately something to do with “dream powers” – hence the sub-title – but this largely serves as an excuse for some Argento-esque surreal setpieces, portrayed in vivid colours and accompanied by an impressive, theatrical Angelo Badalamenti score.

These setpieces, excessive and grand, are the best reason to watch the film. A Freddy-snake consumes a young Patricia Arquette, a sleepwalker is steered to his death as Krueger’s mannequin, his tendons the strings and – in the most effective scene – Freddy’s iconic blades become syringes, piercing the (literally) weeping holes in the arm of an ex-drug addict. It’s campy, but there’s genuine artistry on display.

Rating: 144/200

4 thoughts on “Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)

  1. Pingback: Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (1994) « Carbon Copy

  2. There was something about the Nightmare series that appealed to me. It was definitely a slasheresque theme but Freddy had a lot more charisma than, say, Mike Meyers, but he was also carved from seriously darker stuff. Some of the magic was that in spite of that, the series never took itself that seriously.

    • It’s much more creative than most slasher films thanks to its nightmare-context, which has always been the appeal for me (which is at its peak in this, totally insane film). I agree that Freddy’s charisma and the dark humour of the series work really well in the early films, but I think it’s also responsible for the overly-silly tone of the later sequels (though not Wes Craven’s New Nightmare, which is amazing).

      • I thought the silliness helped it stand out from the plainly silly (but not getting that they were silly) slasher films. But I just love Wes Craven’s mix of horror and goofiness ala “The People Under the Stairs”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s