User Score
5.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 77 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 37 out of 77
  2. Negative: 24 out of 77
Watch 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
  1. JacobB.
    Sep 3, 2007
    0
    How did my favorite Steven King book turn into this crap, the ending was a slap in the face?
  2. JustinS.
    Jun 28, 2006
    0
    By far and away the worst experience of my life. 134 minutes just completely drained down the toilet, which according to this movie contains aliens that come and enter my ass. I have never been more irritated and unsatisfied as I was at the end of this movie. I went in thinking a movie starring Jason Lee, Morgan Freeman and Tom Sizemore based on a Stephen King would be a can't miss. By far and away the worst experience of my life. 134 minutes just completely drained down the toilet, which according to this movie contains aliens that come and enter my ass. I have never been more irritated and unsatisfied as I was at the end of this movie. I went in thinking a movie starring Jason Lee, Morgan Freeman and Tom Sizemore based on a Stephen King would be a can't miss. WRONG. In fact I have never been more wrong; the down syndrome/ alien Donnie Wahlberg angle was the most misconceived subplot I have ever seen in a movie and I saw Gigli and Longshot. I threw my remote at the TV after this and it literally ruined my whole day. If you are really considering seeing this movie call me first I will personally shove a snake up your rearend and kick you in the family jewels while I tell you your were supposed to be an abortion and your parents feel they made the wrong decision. I am putting everyone that had anything to do with this movie on a temporary timeout. Expand
  3. AdamR.
    Nov 28, 2004
    0
    I would rather eat broken glass than watch this again.
  4. JeremyB
    Apr 16, 2008
    0
    Quite possibly the worst movie ever made!
  5. Feb 11, 2011
    1
    Recommended only to those few sadistic people who enjoy watching aliens pop out of butt-holes and bite off human genitalia, complemented by poorly animated martians with british accents. Artistically bankrupt. Pathetic acting. Avoid at all costs.
  6. Feb 7, 2011
    10
    As can be said about many movies, this one is not for everyone. Some films have a broad appeal, this one does not. I love it. As with all Steven King novels/adaptations, it shows what people are capable of (good and bad) by putting them in extreme (read unbelievable) situations. The people in this movie are flawed but noble and offer a good window to the soul. Suspend reality, and commitAs can be said about many movies, this one is not for everyone. Some films have a broad appeal, this one does not. I love it. As with all Steven King novels/adaptations, it shows what people are capable of (good and bad) by putting them in extreme (read unbelievable) situations. The people in this movie are flawed but noble and offer a good window to the soul. Suspend reality, and commit yourself to the people more than the plot and you can enjoy it as well. Expand
  7. Mar 7, 2011
    7
    1st Of All I Love Stephen King Movies!
    2nd Of All This Movie Is NOT For Everyone!
    3rd Of All This Is Fun To Watch And A Good Film.. But You Dont Feel The "King" Spark Like From His Other Films...
    It's Weird But Still Good...
    I Recomand This To Any Hard Core Stephen King Fan....
  8. May 4, 2011
    8
    Just watched this movie in 2011, special effects not all that bad. Suspenseful and eery while maintaining a solid storyline. Haven't read the book. Entertaining movie.
  9. JeannieE.
    Oct 6, 2003
    10
    A really fine Sci-Fi movie, Lawrence Kasdan's adaptation of the Stephen King novel Dreamcatcher (I read the Book) and would urge everyone to read it prior to viewing. Excellent cinematography. good casting, this is a crazed symphony of the supernatural. I will buy this DVD for my collection. The critics were wrong on this one as they are so often.
  10. TomG.
    Oct 9, 2003
    9
    This movie ia awesome. Well portrayed by its' cast, it's definitely one to add to your collection. Donnie Walhberg(of New Kids Fame)does an awesome job as Duddits. I'll be surprised if this movie doesn't win some awards...it's that good.
  11. NickS.
    Mar 20, 2003
    6
    The first thing I have to say is that I am a huge fan of this book. But like most Stephen King novels, it's too hard to adapt to a normal length film. There was SO much left out of the script and SO many changes made that I know it would confuse everyone who didn't read the book. I was able to fill in the gaps due to my prior knowledge so as it's own film, Dreamcatcher The first thing I have to say is that I am a huge fan of this book. But like most Stephen King novels, it's too hard to adapt to a normal length film. There was SO much left out of the script and SO many changes made that I know it would confuse everyone who didn't read the book. I was able to fill in the gaps due to my prior knowledge so as it's own film, Dreamcatcher didn't quite deliver. The storylines were all over the place as well as the tone. Kasdan did a nice job combining humor and spookiness in the film which was reminiscent to the style of another great filmmaker, M.Night Shyamalan. I'm just waiting for the 5 hour unedited DVD or the mini-series that should someday be made. Another thing, the adults were all cast very well even though poor Morgan Freeman had a dismal role and couldn't really shine. All of the kids' scenes were horribly acted and not very typical of Kasdan. All in all, it's a decent film that will make you laugh, make you jump, and do a decent job of entertaining you. But I definitely recommend reading the book before seeing this. C'mon, it's only about 800 pages! Expand
  12. JeremyM.
    Apr 1, 2003
    10
    I found this movie extreme exciting. The cast was excellent, the visuals were great, and it had a great story. I don't know why people absolutly hated this movie. No one complained that Lord of the Rings was too long. The only way I can see people disliking this movie is if they don't like sci-fi or they've read the book and it doesn't meet their expectations. I loved I found this movie extreme exciting. The cast was excellent, the visuals were great, and it had a great story. I don't know why people absolutly hated this movie. No one complained that Lord of the Rings was too long. The only way I can see people disliking this movie is if they don't like sci-fi or they've read the book and it doesn't meet their expectations. I loved this movie and would recommend it to my friends. Expand
  13. Chimp
    Apr 30, 2005
    7
    Oh come on......it wasnt that bad. i liked the first half alot, and then the second half just got too crazy. but i enjoyed it, and thats what counts.
  14. StaceyG.
    Oct 1, 2003
    9
    Dreamcatcher has exellent acting and really drags you into its entertaining world. this movie is the same as the book, it is an escape from reality. if you want a movie to entertain you then watch dreamcatcher, i must warn you it will also make you think afterwords. The ending sways from the book but it is an awesome movie anyway.
  15. AngelP.
    Oct 26, 2003
    6
    This movie starts out as the most brilliant of King's stories that were put to screen. About life and friendship with a smattering of the supernatural for good measure. Then about 40% of the way through the movie, it all goes horribly wrong!!!
  16. TheImminent26
    Mar 31, 2003
    7
    The beginning half of this movie is actually not that bad, its Kind of funny, and somewhat creepy. but as the movie moves along it just displeases me, and i am assuming it did the same to most other people. The worst thing about the beginning is (I hate to say it)but many of the jokes are in horrible spots or perhaps they are not meant to be concieved as jokes, but when a drunk guy gets The beginning half of this movie is actually not that bad, its Kind of funny, and somewhat creepy. but as the movie moves along it just displeases me, and i am assuming it did the same to most other people. The worst thing about the beginning is (I hate to say it)but many of the jokes are in horrible spots or perhaps they are not meant to be concieved as jokes, but when a drunk guy gets attacked while trying to take a piss i laugh . Chad was right too much military is distracting. Expand
  17. JimmyA.
    Apr 20, 2003
    0
    The trailers for "Dreamcatcher" want you to believe that it's a psychological thriller combined with science fiction aliens. The movie is, sadly, not the case. "Dreamcatcher" is not a "Signs". It is a spectacle of vomiting proprotions...[Potential spoiler deleted]. Not only that, it is a poor adaptation full of cliches and pathetic acting. The military aspect of the movie was The trailers for "Dreamcatcher" want you to believe that it's a psychological thriller combined with science fiction aliens. The movie is, sadly, not the case. "Dreamcatcher" is not a "Signs". It is a spectacle of vomiting proprotions...[Potential spoiler deleted]. Not only that, it is a poor adaptation full of cliches and pathetic acting. The military aspect of the movie was emphasised on too much and I found the storyline about the Down-syndrome kid a bit disturbing. Expand
  18. EricC.
    Apr 6, 2003
    2
    The only reason to see this movie is to watch the Animatrix short (which was alright.) I stuck around for about 30 minutes of this movie, but I couldn't stand the stupidity of the script. How many ways can you adjust the f-word anyway? This film had some terrible acting from actors who looked pretty good. Dreamcatcher lost me twenty minutes into the story, and I don't want to The only reason to see this movie is to watch the Animatrix short (which was alright.) I stuck around for about 30 minutes of this movie, but I couldn't stand the stupidity of the script. How many ways can you adjust the f-word anyway? This film had some terrible acting from actors who looked pretty good. Dreamcatcher lost me twenty minutes into the story, and I don't want to figure it out anyway. (And no one complained about Lord of the Rings because it was GOOD.) Collapse
  19. JonB.
    Sep 30, 2003
    1
    Quite possibly the worst movie, I have ever seen in the theater. A promising start but the movie falls apart on every level after about a half hour.
  20. AlexH.
    Jun 8, 2009
    6
    Somehow, Stephen King movies never follow the book with the films endings compared to the books. Dreamcatcher isn't necessarily a bad movie, but it isn't a good one. As it lagged through the middle of the movie, I found myself waiting, starring at my computer screen, waiting for the movie to pick up where it first started.
  21. fg
    Feb 2, 2010
    1
    This film works FAR better as a book. They should have never adapted it for the screen. Many of the inner voice dialouges that worked so well in the novel just don't work in a movie like they were meant to be, and the movie often feels like a bad joke. Along with horrible acting, storytelling and plot development, Dreamcatcher is also horrible at entertaining the viewer. The CGI was This film works FAR better as a book. They should have never adapted it for the screen. Many of the inner voice dialouges that worked so well in the novel just don't work in a movie like they were meant to be, and the movie often feels like a bad joke. Along with horrible acting, storytelling and plot development, Dreamcatcher is also horrible at entertaining the viewer. The CGI was overbearingly fake looking and the awful performances from the usually decent actors did nothing to rectify it. Two thumbs WAAAAYYYY down! The only reason i gave it a 1 is because my sister and I got SUCH a laugh out of this bad film that it was at least worth viewing once. Expand
  22. Ishii
    Oct 25, 2003
    5
    Well that made a lot of sense.
  23. TinaT.
    Mar 21, 2003
    4
    This movie was so godawful that it provided 2 1/2 hours of near nonstop laughs at the end of a terribly tense week. This is the kind of flick Mystery Science Theater would have snapped up in a heartbeat.
  24. Jovi
    Mar 20, 2003
    5
    How many times will Stephen King books get butchered on screen? The book is amazing, and the film's first 30 minutes delivers, however, after that it's all downhill. We go from a smart Sci Fi thriller with some great scares to your generic, been there, alien film. Very disappointing considering the great cast and director. They should have made this a mini series for cable or a How many times will Stephen King books get butchered on screen? The book is amazing, and the film's first 30 minutes delivers, however, after that it's all downhill. We go from a smart Sci Fi thriller with some great scares to your generic, been there, alien film. Very disappointing considering the great cast and director. They should have made this a mini series for cable or a 4 hour film. Unless you know the book, you will not know what the hell is going on and why. Expand
  25. JinC.
    Mar 22, 2003
    8
    wow, i really am mystified by how lukewarm the critics are toward this movie! it's great! and it has everything! aliens, contagion panic, military black ops, superheroes, heroes whose true virtues are being pure at heart, the memory castle of matteo ricci, EVERYTHING! sure, a lot of it is a basic hollywood glam take but it is very well done, and very entertaining. in addition, it wow, i really am mystified by how lukewarm the critics are toward this movie! it's great! and it has everything! aliens, contagion panic, military black ops, superheroes, heroes whose true virtues are being pure at heart, the memory castle of matteo ricci, EVERYTHING! sure, a lot of it is a basic hollywood glam take but it is very well done, and very entertaining. in addition, it ends up tastefully depicting the gore without telegraphing its limits - of what it will or will not show - so that the suspense in the scary scenes are always ratcheted up pretty high. basically a fairy tale with a heckuva lot of gore. i must confess that i went for the 'the final flight of the osiris' and i actually found that somewhat disappointing. the mistake that squaresoft keeps making is that they don't take advantage of the fact that what they are making is ANIMATION! don't they watch their own country's anime? the ability to stylize, to amp up, to exaggerate - these are the advantages of animation - and can be found in so many cool japanimation shows. but in doing SO much mo-cap - whose choreography is CUT RATE AT BEST, they deny themselves one of animations great strengths and incur 'THE WORST OF ALL WORLDS'. bah, so much ability, such little wisdom. the story itself is really cool and some of the visuals really are quite astonishing. but the action choreography in the beginning really pales in comparison to even keanu's martial arts in the first film (and that's saying a lot). but again, good story, cool visuals, and truly, the finest use of bullet time camera orbiting and cg ever seen by man - you'll know it when you see it. man, that was fine. jin Expand
  26. JanetL.
    Mar 24, 2003
    9
    I really liked this movie...i can understand how people might dislike the movie or not understand it but they never explain why it is bad????? I can't say there was a part i disliked
  27. HereComesGilbertMulroneycakes
    Mar 29, 2003
    3
    Aw, nuts. And it looked like it was going to be great from the previews. It starts off pretty good, but degenerates into a chase-the-monster movie. And not a very good one. I hope Damian Lewis finds something great, and soon, because he's a very fab actor. And so's Freeman. Find something better to do, both of you, before you die.
  28. Sleepingwithghosts
    Apr 18, 2003
    2
    As bad as "Jeepers Creepers" and "Urban Legends Final Cut". King surely had diarrhoea after watching this film.
  29. LuisR.
    Apr 18, 2003
    0
    This movie is silly, incoherent, and a complete insult to the intelligent viewer. Not to blame Kasdan and Goldman alone, King also deserves recognition for having written such an awful book, which inspired a ridiculous script and consequently a horrible movie. Going from humour to 'horror,' this is a movie that expects the audience to laugh at crude fart jokes, and be scared at This movie is silly, incoherent, and a complete insult to the intelligent viewer. Not to blame Kasdan and Goldman alone, King also deserves recognition for having written such an awful book, which inspired a ridiculous script and consequently a horrible movie. Going from humour to 'horror,' this is a movie that expects the audience to laugh at crude fart jokes, and be scared at aliens that burst from our asses. Despite the good performances by the actors, this movie cannot be saved from the awful script it has. Expand
  30. AdamE.
    Apr 28, 2003
    6
    Metascore 30 ? Ridiculous! This film was messed up but the acting I thought was excellent and the beginning of the film brilliant! It's when the aliens appear that it all goes pear shaped.
  31. GarethG.
    May 16, 2003
    10
    I loved it Though i can see why people don't like it. I think it was also advertised wrong (( the same as signs was) but i loved the film from start to finish.
  32. Romanski
    Sep 22, 2003
    10
    What is cinema all about?Right, ENTERTAINMENT.I can only recommend this big buget movie! Good story, good location, good acting and good special effects.
  33. AlanB.
    Mar 31, 2004
    5
    I put a 5 rating for this because, honestly, this is a series of images committed to film that simply defies qualitative logic. It is, on all scales, the first film of this or any other century. Filmmaking has been redefined forever in the light of this mess that proves that even the most talented contributors (Freeman, Kasdan, Goldman) can be left wondering how the hell they got attached I put a 5 rating for this because, honestly, this is a series of images committed to film that simply defies qualitative logic. It is, on all scales, the first film of this or any other century. Filmmaking has been redefined forever in the light of this mess that proves that even the most talented contributors (Freeman, Kasdan, Goldman) can be left wondering how the hell they got attached to this. "Dreamcatcher" moves from astonishing to absurd and back while leaving the audience cursing themselves for having seen it and laughing at others for having not seen it. Truly an experience that simultaneously makes you better and worse for having endured it. Expand
  34. PituG.
    Oct 26, 2003
    6
    Was expecting much more.
  35. PhillipK.
    Mar 22, 2003
    4
    This film suffers from a serious identity crisis. The paranormal themes thrown together with an alien invasion and male bonding drama may have been successfully pulled off in King's book (I didn't read it) but these things simply cannot be taken seriously as a single storyline for a 2-hour movie. Kasdan tried to incorporate too many of the characters with backstories of their This film suffers from a serious identity crisis. The paranormal themes thrown together with an alien invasion and male bonding drama may have been successfully pulled off in King's book (I didn't read it) but these things simply cannot be taken seriously as a single storyline for a 2-hour movie. Kasdan tried to incorporate too many of the characters with backstories of their own and ended up spreading them all very thin. And the various plots/subplots seem forced and poorly tied together, probably because there was no time to flesh out what King took 800 pages to explain. Then Kasdan to make room for gross-out/whiz-bang special effects sequences on top of everything else. But who can swallow a movie that starts off like a credible Stand By Me-type buddy picture and develops into a story with hideous flesh-eating alien slugs, kids with ESP, sci-fi body-snatching, and a miliitary assault on a stadium-sized turtle-shaped spaceship (a scene which just seemed to come out of nowhere)? Not me. Expand
  36. MarkM.
    Mar 22, 2003
    0
    Despite being penned by William Goldman and directed by Lawrence Kasdan, Dreamcatcher is, perhaps, one of the worst films ever made. After the first twenty minutes, the story derails into a frenzied, disconnected series of all-but-random scenes. Something happens with slug-like aliens, a red fungus, a military operation, a crashed spaceship, and a quartet of immature life-long friends ... Despite being penned by William Goldman and directed by Lawrence Kasdan, Dreamcatcher is, perhaps, one of the worst films ever made. After the first twenty minutes, the story derails into a frenzied, disconnected series of all-but-random scenes. Something happens with slug-like aliens, a red fungus, a military operation, a crashed spaceship, and a quartet of immature life-long friends ... but nothing worth watching, and certainly nothing worth paying for. These are mucked together with every cliche from every Stephen King novel ever written, from the small group of psychic friends in IT to The Mentally Disadvantaged Man Who Saves the World from The Stand. Not even Morgan Freeman, who must be slumming around in this stinker as a way of paying off the mortgage on his Cleveland, MS, restaurant, Madidi, can drag a shred of narrative coherency from this turgid wreck ... so he spends the better part of the last of the film waggling a bad pair of fake gray eyebrows, pounding down liquor, and gunning folk down with helicopter-mounted machine guns. Add to this King's penchant for stilted, juvenile dialogue ("Scooby-dooby-doo, we got some work to do," our hero sighs, barely able to keep a straight face) and over-the-top sentimentalism (as she sends her retarded son off to, well, save the world, his mother whispers, "You go save the world, baby."), and you get a movie that's about as enticing as two hours at the oral surgeon's office. How ... how ... how do movies like this get made? I'll never doubt MetaCritic again. Expand
  37. ChadS.
    Mar 24, 2003
    6
    Of note, "Dreamcatcher" gives the mentally challenged their own superhero. The ending is ludicrous and yet undeniably exhilirating. If the millitary aspect of the film was scaled down and the action genre inevitables(Freeman's showdown with Sizemore) left on the cutting room floor, you'd have a pretty good monster flick. The blending of "Alien" and "Stand by Me" isn't the Of note, "Dreamcatcher" gives the mentally challenged their own superhero. The ending is ludicrous and yet undeniably exhilirating. If the millitary aspect of the film was scaled down and the action genre inevitables(Freeman's showdown with Sizemore) left on the cutting room floor, you'd have a pretty good monster flick. The blending of "Alien" and "Stand by Me" isn't the problem. It's that third strand. Morgan Freeman and Tom Sizemore are unwelcome here. Expand
  38. MikeM.
    Mar 27, 2003
    2
    The only reason this movie got a 2 is because the Matrix short was before it. Good cast and bad script amount toa horrible movie. King must have really been on medication when he wrote the book because its a mish mash of crappy scenes that dont amount to anything scary or entertaining.
  39. JonathanP.
    Mar 27, 2003
    1
    Quite honestly the worst movie I've ever had the displeasure of viewing. Not only is the whole thing just an utterly painful experience to watch, it's entirely too long and needed to have about 45 minutes of its length trimmed. Avoid at ALL COSTS.
  40. Sam
    Mar 16, 2004
    0
    It was dull and bad. And it didn't make any sense.
  41. TerryG.
    Jun 24, 2004
    6
    Anyone who read the book is gonna be disappointed in the movie version. To stay true to the storyline all the way to the end and then change the ending ruins the whole experience. Caught myself screaming at the screen (and my wife) "That's not how it ends!!!" Would've been higher if ending would've been the same.
  42. Aug 16, 2010
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Sci-Fi / Horror genere has been always my favorite so naturally i'll try to get involved into it. Idea of movie was all i could desire but it wasn't perfect tough. Needless to say i enojyed watching it. I wasnt really happy with the cast plus characters were dull and boring but they did their job. I wasnt really satisfied with the enviroment either, there was nothing but snow so it was also dull and boring. Story was great in the other hand. With more effort and bigger budget this movie would have been awesome. Expand
  43. Jul 31, 2011
    0
    I think roughly 99% of the people that watched this movie did so to catch the 10 minute Animatrix movie before hand. Dreamcatcher was terrible. Morgan Freeman's eyebrows almost poked my eyes out.

    I did learn that you develop an English accent after having your body taken over by an alien. That was interesting.
  44. Nov 10, 2014
    9
    This movie and the story isn't that bad at all and seriously under evaluated. Not a masterpiece but really worth it if you like alien fiction.
    I wonder what people have in mind giving 10 to idea-free crap like The Gravity and 1 to Dreamcatcher. Well, that's how it is.
  45. Jul 7, 2013
    5
    The idea for this science fiction horror film is remarkable. But the poor executions makes the film ends up as a ridiculous and pointless monster film.
  46. Oct 19, 2014
    8
    This movie was actually pretty good and certain parts of it were really good. The aliens were creepy and scary and the characters were entertaining. I've been meaning to watch it ever since it came out. I actually tried to watch it in theatres but was turned away for being under 14 years old. Finally watched it today, and I'm glad that I did.
Metascore
35

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 38
  2. Negative: 16 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: David Rooney
    30
    Overlong and unwieldy grab-bag of vintage monster-movie elements starts intriguingly as a snowbound deep-woods chiller, but gradually dissolves into a mess of other-worldly invasion and military counter-offensive.
  2. 20
    Perhaps due to the talent of everyone involved, Dreamcatcher moves with an oddly exhilarating awfulness that sets it apart from more run-of-the-mill horror films, which lack the imagination and budget to be so thoroughly misconceived.
  3. 40
    A really illogical and silly movie.