Metascore
31

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 13 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 13
  2. Negative: 7 out of 13
  1. Delpy and Scott are able to put it over. She's French and deep and mysterious. He's a fresh-faced American, an open book. Liking them makes it possible to (kinda) like this otherwise routine horror movie.
  2. 38
    Delpy's injection of class into an otherwise classless production raises the specter of what this film could have been with a better script and a better cast surrounding her.
  3. 25
    Any plot discipline (necessary so that we care about some characters and not the others) has been lost in an orgy of special effects and general mayhem.
  4. Reviewed by: Derek Elley
    70
    An enjoyably trashy blend of impressive special effects, low-key refs to Landis's movie, and sudden moments of horror breaking the jokey tone.
  5. A slapdash, poorly acted, paint-by-numbers teen horror comedy, the sequel is too frenetically edited to build any suspense, and its special effects are strictly bargain basement.
  6. 20
    Ugly Americans in Paris have run-ins with the native werewolf culture in this horror-for-laughs story, in which the characters' stupidity and the deadpan acting are out of sync--instead of being campy or clever, the plot and performances are just unconvincing.
  7. A painfully anemic variation on John Landis' 1981 winner, "An American Werewolf in London." While the original had both wit and poignancy--and an affectionate and knowing tip-of-the-hat to werewolf movies past--this slapdash, silly new edition is so cut-rate it has Luxembourg and Amsterdam standing in for the City of Light.
  8. It's all too silly to bother. Without style and attitude, nothing gets old faster than horror.
  9. Reviewed by: Andy Seiler
    63
    The computer animation of the monsters here is a herky-jerky cartoon blur that is anything but scary.
  10. Given Waller's experience and budget, one might expect he could upgrade the B-movie acting and stock situations. He doesn't. The pay-off comes not in the story or acting, but the camera play and movement.
  11. 50
    Forget about social significance, depth of character and complex thematic underpinnings, and repeat after me: "It's only a werewolf movie."
  12. Plenty of gore-slinging, wisecracking fun to be had, and yes, the repulsively convincing werewolf transformations and attacks still pack a breath-stopping wallop.
  13. The cruddy, shot-in-a-warehouse settings are especially depressing, since the computer-generated special effects seem to be taking place in another movie entirely (a far livelier one). [9 Jan 1998, p. 47]
User Score
4.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 3
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 3
  3. Negative: 2 out of 3
  1. May 30, 2013
    1
    This movie sucked when it came out, and it has aged horribly. The CGI is awful, the story is stale, and the laughs are forced.

    An American
    Werewolf in London is way better. Full Review »
  2. Jan 6, 2013
    10
    epic
  3. Sep 22, 2012
    2
    While I did not enjoy the first film an american werewolf in Paris is dreadful in almost every category. The acting is horrible including Julie Delpy who was so good in before sunrise and sunset. The film is not scary or funny it trades stupid humor over campyness and horrible CG instead of dark make-up werewolves. I hated all the characters and the relationship between the two leads. Full Review »