Cursed

User Score
8.8

Universal acclaim- based on 230 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 17 out of 230

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

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

User Reviews

  1. Sep 12, 2014
    6
    This movie deserves three stars for at least somewhat making sense (yes, there is a plot in this one), and for Milo Ventimiglia being there, totally awesome & gay - that always deserves an extra star in my book!

    I watched this movie purely because of Milo. And of course, I'm interested in supernatural, but I don't like horror flicks. From the few little previews I had seen, I knew this
    This movie deserves three stars for at least somewhat making sense (yes, there is a plot in this one), and for Milo Ventimiglia being there, totally awesome & gay - that always deserves an extra star in my book!

    I watched this movie purely because of Milo. And of course, I'm interested in supernatural, but I don't like horror flicks. From the few little previews I had seen, I knew this movie wasn't going to look very realistic, though. The werewolves made me smirk, and oh, no one told me this movie is pretty comedic at places! Werewolf flipping a bird; now that's not something you see every day.

    Comedy aside, there is a plot in here, which thickens by the end. Of course some of the plot twists are predictable, and some just plain silly. Like werewolves popping up randomly for no apparent reason, other than a rather hollow plot point...

    The acting isn't brilliant, but not bad either. I did love Milo's role as Bo, though.

    As a horror movie, there are the usual elements of surprise. The gore is hinted at but not shown.

    All in all, a decent movie, but nothing better than that.
    Expand
  2. Dec 4, 2010
    4
    Although not without its moments, Cursed is a disappointing horror comedy of appalingly weak performances, repulsively cheesy VFX and a wildly predictable script.
  3. MarkB.
    Jun 25, 2005
    6
    Horror legend Wes Craven once gave us Vampire in Brooklyn; assisted by genre-bending coconspirator Kevin Williamson (of the first two Scream movies) he now serves up what could be called Werewolf in Hollywood. This diverting offering is more funny than scary; in fact, the gory eviscerations in the unrated DVD edition are so over-the-top that it's hard to see how anyone could be Horror legend Wes Craven once gave us Vampire in Brooklyn; assisted by genre-bending coconspirator Kevin Williamson (of the first two Scream movies) he now serves up what could be called Werewolf in Hollywood. This diverting offering is more funny than scary; in fact, the gory eviscerations in the unrated DVD edition are so over-the-top that it's hard to see how anyone could be offended or even grossed out. (In fact, the movie's most amusing line is uttered by a cop who, after demolishing a werewolf in a truly spectacular way, wonders if it's really necessary to cut its head off.) Christina Ricci, Jesse Eisenberg and Joshua Jackson learn that (as Lon Chaney Jr.'s mopey Lawrence Talbot never did) that becoming a werewolf can increase one's physical prowess, social standing and sex appeal, although Ricci doesn't really need much help in the latter department. Typically amusing Williamson dialogue and enjoyable performances (especially a sparkling comic one by Judy Greer as Ricci's rival and an admirably good-sportsmanlike one by Scott Baio, playing himself in a role that comments frankly on his C-list status, as if his appearance in Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2 didn't say it all) and Craven's equal facility with light comic as well as horror sequences make this an almost-guilty pleasure...but it loses points for a wishy-washy ending and a long mistaken-meaning riff that correlates lycanthropy and homosexuality, but was done better on Buffy the Vampire Slayer over a decade ago. Worst of all is the fact that this movie is an example of an ever-increasing trend in horror movies that show up in theatres in butchered, PG-13 versions...and then appear a few months later in uncut DVD versions so that viewers, in essence, pay for them twice...an act of corporate chicanery that almost makes certain pyramid schemes shut down by the government seem honest by comparison. Normally I believe that movies are made for theatres and should be seen in them whenever possible, but I'll make an exception here: whenever you hear of a PG-13 horror film, wait to rent the DVD. If the DVD's uncut, you're seeing it the way the filmmakers intended and only shelling out once; if it's still a PG-13, you haven't lost anything. By golly, somebody's gotta teach these studios that double-dipping doesn't pay! Expand
  4. RobertG.
    Feb 28, 2005
    4
    Wow. This has got to be one of the worst movies I have seen in a while. First off the script is horrible. Especially the beginning and end. Secondly, it has very predictable scenes, but a not so unpredictable script. I think this is more of a comedy than a horror.
Metascore
31

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 21
  2. Negative: 12 out of 21
  1. It's hard to tell who is more Cursed - the pretty young people who turn into werewolves on screen or the people who buy tickets for this slow, witless, predictable horror flick.
  2. 25
    Unlike Cursed, which resorts to blatant but unconvincing gore and violence, "The Wolf Man" (1941) gets its point across through suggestion, makeup and spooky sets.
  3. The film vacillates between inanity and flat-out lameness, and the decision to recut from an R-rated version to a PG-13 sucked out whatever life might have been left.