25
Metascore
13 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- 50MovielineStephanie ZacharekMovielineStephanie ZacharekThe picture is directed with such a loose, slack hand that you'd think Craven had never directed a slasher-thriller before: I didn't jump once; I never even felt vaguely scared or creeped out.
- 40The Hollywood ReporterFrank ScheckThe Hollywood ReporterFrank ScheckDull, talk-heavy snoozer that most closely resembles something that would show up on the CW network.
- 40Boxoffice MagazineSteve RamosBoxoffice MagazineSteve RamosTurns out to be a huge disappointment.
- 33The A.V. ClubKeith PhippsThe A.V. ClubKeith PhippsAs for the 3-D, much ballyhooed in the film's advertisements, it's another muddy conversion that does little but make the film's unconvincing blood effects look a little darker. It's good, theoretically at least, to have Craven back. But why come back for this?
- 30L.A. WeeklyNick PinkertonL.A. WeeklyNick PinkertonAll might be good for a flask-to-the-theater laugh, if not for the unconscionable price gouging.
- 25Orlando SentinelRoger MooreOrlando SentinelRoger MooreThis waking nightmare from the "Nightmare on Elm Street" creator is a puzzle with no solutions, a tale with a twist that isn't a twist at all.
- 25Boston GlobeWesley MorrisBoston GlobeWesley MorrisI watched at least a quarter of My Soul to Take, the worst horror movie Wes Craven's made perhaps ever, with the glasses off. It was shot - and is available - in a standard format, and, like many conversions, the 3-D gimmick is like watching a movie through an ashtray.
- 20VarietyDennis HarveyVarietyDennis HarveyThis dumb, derivative teen slasher movie would be uninspiring coming from any writer-director, let alone one with several genre classics under his belt.
- 16Entertainment WeeklyAdam MarkovitzEntertainment WeeklyAdam MarkovitzWes Craven's first new movie in five years is a brainless, joyless, and yes, you might even say, soulless teen slasher.