Advanced Search Beta »
Basic Search Fields
Chloe
Metascore
48 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 33 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 33
  2. Mixed: 19 out of 33
  3. Negative: 4 out of 33
view
per page
  1. Chicago Sun-Times
    Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    88
    It's not the kind of movie that depends on the certainty of an ending. It's more about how things continue.
  2. San Francisco Chronicle
    Reviewed by: Mick LaSalle
    75
    The success of Chloe is largely due to the contribution of screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson.
  3. The Globe and Mail (Toronto)
    Reviewed by: Liam Lacey
    75
    Chloe is director Atom Egoyan's foray into the realm of what might be called artful trash. This is a high-toned erotic thriller, handled with style and some emotionally raw scenes, aiming for an effect that's pleasingly unnerving, if not outright arousing.
  4. St. Louis Post-Dispatch
    Reviewed by: Calvin Wilson
    75
    Egoyan doesn't flinch from exploring the dark side of curiosity. That includes dealing with sexuality in a way that might make some moviegoers uncomfortable.
  5. The Hollywood Reporter
    Reviewed by: Michael Rechtshaffen
    70
    Moore and Neeson beautifully underplay their roles, lending screenwriter Erin Cressida Wilson's ("Secretary") dialogue an unexpected, palpable poignancy.
  6. Portland Oregonian
    Reviewed by: Marc Mohan
    67
    The ensuing love triangle culminates in a frankly loopy finale that tarnishes the film's earlier insights and ensures that it will be only remembered for some hot and heavy bedroom scenes.
  7. Tampa Bay Times
    Reviewed by: Steve Persall
    67
    The movie maintains its posture of mystery long after the solution is evident, and the best suggestion is to just smirk with the flow.
  8. Philadelphia Inquirer
    Reviewed by: Carrie Rickey
    63
    There are two questions to ask about a film such as Chloe: Is it erotic? Yes. Is it good? Yes, until it devolves into third-act pretentiousness and preposterousness.
  9. ReelViews
    Reviewed by: James Berardinelli
    63
    For those who remember Egoyan at the top of his craft, there's no way to represent this as anything less than another disappointment.
  10. New York Observer
    Reviewed by: Sara Vilkomerson
    63
    With a different cast and director, this movie would be just another fuzzily lit made-for-TV movie. But because of the performances and the rather gorgeous cinematography, one is left wishing that it just could have been something more.
  11. Empire
    Reviewed by: Anna Smith
    60
    Strong turns from its female leads and Amanda Seyfried elicits more sexual tension from proceedings than "Jennifer's Body" ever managed.
  12. Boxoffice Magazine
    Reviewed by: Pam Grady
    60
    Fails to completely satisfy, thanks to problems with the script that neither director nor stars can overcome.
  13. The A.V. Club
    Reviewed by: Keith Phipps
    58
    It all goes awry in the end, but for a good stretch, Chloe neatly fixes Egoyan's career-long obsessions with identity and communication to the familiar framework of the erotic thriller.
  14. Christian Science Monitor
    Reviewed by: Peter Rainer
    58
    The film somehow manages to be both a turn-on and a turnoff.
  15. NPR
    Reviewed by: Mark Jenkins
    50
    But c'mon! Erotic obsession, catfights, naked chicks making out -- at heart Chloe is a midnight movie, and all the Vivaldi in the world can't change that.
  16. Rolling Stone
    Reviewed by: Peter Travers
    50
    I didn't believe a word of it.
  17. New York Post
    Reviewed by: Kyle Smith
    50
    A Skinemax movie cloaked in art-house fancy dress, the sex thriller Chloe might have worked better as an out-and-out popcorn flick starring, say, Jennifer Lopez.
  18. Charlotte Observer
    Reviewed by: Lawrence Toppman
    50
    Good acting from the three principals – four, if we count Max Thieriot as the son – keeps this leaky craft afloat for quite a while.
  19. New Orleans Times-Picayune
    Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    50
    It's neither a good movie nor a bad movie. It's just a movie.
  20. Arizona Republic
    Reviewed by: Bill Goodykoontz
    50
    The story is the problem here, devolving into a ridiculous situation that produces far more groans than chills or thrills.
  21. Entertainment Weekly
    Reviewed by: Owen Gleiberman
    50
    The film is Moore's story, and she acts the hell out of one sexy scene, but most of Chloe is plodding and drab.
  22. New York Magazine (Vulture)
    Reviewed by: David Edelstein
    50
    Few films go as obviously and bewilderingly wrong as Chloe, but for the first hour it's a potent little melodrama in which the smooth, super-controlled storytelling contains the theme of unruly obsession like a straitjacket.
  23. Village Voice
    Reviewed by: J. Hoberman
    50
    Thanks to Egoyan's trademark mix of detachment and prurience, the fun is more cheesy than queasy.
  24. Los Angeles Times
    Reviewed by: Betsy Sharkey
    50
    Envisioned as a psychosexual thriller about a woman scorned, director Atom Egoyan's latest puzzle is just puzzling, little more than a messy affair with mood lighting, sexy lingerie, heavy breathing and swelling, um, music.
  25. The New York Times
    Reviewed by: A.O. Scott
    50
    Mr. Egoyan has shown off these etchings before -- a solemn young woman in lingerie, a handsome older man in the throes of erotic distress -- and the artistry he brings to the display feels tired and thin this time around. Chloe works hard at seduction, but its heart isn't really in the game.
  26. Slate
    Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    50
    Chloe remains engaging for longer than any movie this schlocky and overwritten has a right to be. But the movie loses what little goodwill it's managed to build up by the last act, which feels clumsily grafted from a completely different film.
  27. Variety
    Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    50
    Sexual suspicion and game-playing spiral down from the exotically intriguing to outright silliness in Chloe.
  28. Chicago Reader
    Reviewed by: J.R. Jones
    50
    As the aching spouse, Moore delivers what is for her an unusually sympathetic performance.
  29. Austin Chronicle
    Reviewed by: Marjorie Baumgarten
    40
    While Chloe may seem reminiscent of Egoyan's outlandish thriller "Where the Truth Lies," it also calls to mind another would-be thriller about marital infidelity that starred Neeson and was utterly ludicrous: "The Other Man."
  30. Boston Globe
    Reviewed by: Janice Page
    38
    It can't be recommended even to people who mostly just want to see Amanda Seyfried naked.
  31. The New Yorker
    Reviewed by: Anthony Lane
    30
    The movie--directed by Atom Egoyan, who should know better--is closely adapted from "Nathalie," a French film of 2004, with Gérard Depardieu and Emmanuelle Béart, but what seemed like standard practice for Parisians comes across here as unsmiling porno-farce.
  32. New York Daily News
    Reviewed by: Elizabeth Weitzman
    20
    A tacky 'Fatal Attraction' for the lesbian set.
  33. Time Out New York
    Reviewed by: Joshua Rothkopf
    20
    This sex thriller is trapped in a tepid zone between quality trash and pretentious psychodrama.
prev next
Page:
  • 1

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
5.2 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 40 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 13
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 13
  3. Negative: 5 out of 13
  1. grandpajoe6191
    5
    "Chloe" is sleek and tense, but fails to maneuver that energy till the end of the movie.
  2. bethesdabob
    0
    This movie is terrible. It's very, very predictable, even if you have only a little imagination. It only gets a good review from critics, because Liam Neeson is in it. Don't waste your time.… Full Review »
  3. RegOz
    8
    This movie has surprised me! It is intense, rich, and deep. The original is the French movie 'Nathalie' with Emmanuelle Beart. 'Nathalie' is a classic and I did enjoy it, but I feel ' Chloe' was superior. In my opinion, Atom Egoyan has delivered to us an improved story that I felt real. If you ask me to pick a flaw, I wouldn't be able to do so...at least not promptly. The art direction was great too, and all the actors's performances were excellent, but Amanda Seyfried was simply outstanding! If you have the chance to watch both of them, do it and then pick your favourite...but don't just trust the reviews...try it yourself!… Full Review »
See all user reviews »