User Score
6.7

Generally favorable reviews- based on 222 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 29 out of 222

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 2, 2014
    9
    God, this movie was really, really, gripping. Even if it doesn't live up to The Conjuring, 1408 is still another great Stephen King adaptation. Samuel L. Jackson and John Cusack are perfect in this movie.
  2. Apr 29, 2011
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Given that King adaptations are typically awful jokes, 1408 merits praise merely for being not abysmal. That said - it's a good little chiller that should have been great. So much is wonderful, including Cusack's droll awareness of playing the same, weary, cynical dude. The settings, the silences, the pacing - all grand, really. What goes wrong? TOO MUCH EXPOSITION, and the misleading kind. Based on the first 30 minutes, 1408 is beyond deadly. It's sadistic, vile, and very, very fast, given the self-mutilations which have occurred within it, and in mere minutes. But Cusack's experience, a few harmless phantoms aside, isn't terrifying; it's all about sadness and his personal despair. I expect more from a room that induces a maid to stab her eyes out in mere seconds.
    But - hey, it's all right. And the hotel window/ledge scenes are bloody fabulous.
    Expand
Metascore
64

Generally favorable reviews - based on 27 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 27
  2. Negative: 0 out of 27
  1. A deft Stephen King freak-out.
  2. Reviewed by: Stephen Farber
    70
    Even with its flaws, 1408 deserves to be appreciated by connoisseurs of acting and bravura filmmaking.
  3. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    70
    For star John Cusack, it's a perfect fit.