Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 32 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 32
  2. Negative: 23 out of 32
  1. 50
    It's a thriller, a bad thriller, completely lacking in psychological or emotional truth.
  2. Downright scary in some places, Godsend might be more potent if it wasn't watered down by religious trope predictability.
  3. Unravels in a series of spooky dream sequences, dopey detective work, and a couple of richly hambone-ian De Niro soliloquies.
  4. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    The best that can be said about the film is that its naturalistic look and dark hues are occasionally intriguing, and its twist is fairly unpredictable, if far-fetched.
  5. Godsend is two-thirds of a good movie, with a final third that's just downright awful. So much wasted potential only makes the whole thing that much more painful.
  6. The umpteenth recycled shocker about a mystical dark child with an aura of disaster.
  7. To its credit, the film has an engagingly bleak and minimalist look, and a brisk pace. But the chills are few. Every step seems contrived, predictable or unintentionally funny.
  8. Reviewed by: Pete Vonder Haar
    When is a horror movie not a horror movie? When it’s a strained, by-the-numbers production that limps to an unlikely conclusion like Godsend.
  9. Reviewed by: Joe Leydon
    Solid performances, handsome production values and a few genuinely creepy scenes are not enough to save Godsend.
  10. Reviewed by: Aaron Hillis
    With its cheap scares, its defiant lack of special effects, and the most blatant usage of a red coat as a stand-out prop since Schindler’s List, Godsend is as much an experiment-gone-wrong as its Frankensteinesque plot.
  11. De Niro wears a shamefaced look most of the time, as if doubly embarrassed: He agreed to a movie he knew was worthless, yet he's too lazy or indifferent to give us his best.
  12. This thin concoction of domestic drama and thriller suspense won't hold up after the curiosity factor runs its brief course. Neither Robert De Niro nor a phalanx of a dozen producers can deliver Godsend from unintentional comedy.
  13. 30
    Despite its provocative premise, this throwback to deliberately paced, low-tech chillers of the pre-CGI era is a dreary slog through haunted-child movie cliches -- portentous dreams, glassy-eyed stares, cryptic pronouncements.
  14. 30
    Kinnear and Romijn-Stamos appear to be vying for the title of filmdom's least-convincing married couple, while Robert De Niro, as the movie's modern-day Dr. Frankenstein, takes his own expert career slumming to a new depth -- he's become an evil clone of a once-great actor.
  15. A consistently underused and often underrated actor, Kinnear gives one of those sympathetic performances that prevent you from believing the worst about a movie despite the sounding alarms.
  16. 30
    The picture, which fails to achieve its ambitions or to fulfill our expectations, is ultimately worse than a violent piece of hack work, in which the director isn't interested in displaying his integrity -- or taste. You'd be better off downloading the trailer: a much more convincing piece of storytelling.
  17. As the film's boo! moments get spookier and more frequent, Godsend gets more and more inane.
  18. 30
    As in most bad thrillers, the number of pointless shocks increases in direct proportion to the drama's decreasing vitality, like defibrilator paddles jolting a dying man.
  19. 25
    Every scare is telegraphed. Every surprise is recycled from a better thriller. Even the devil would send this one back.
  20. How could such a high-octane cast produce such low-octane horror?
  21. 25
    An unsatisfying, overly restrained bore, capped off by an ending so strange and inconclusive, it feels like something you'd find on the ''deleted scenes'' portion of a DVD.
  22. At the half-hour mark, Godsend falls off the edge of reason, veering wildly away from what seems the promising beginning of a drama about the ethics of human cloning and instead becomes the cheesiest of hallucinatory horror movies.
  23. 25
    There's no excuse for a thriller as lame, leaden and unthrilling as Godsend, which manages to take a potentially interesting subject - human cloning - and use it to put audiences to sleep.
  24. In Godsend, we have the spectacle of three good actors tied to the mast of a sinking premise.
  25. Reviewed by: Mark Dinning
    Godsend is based on an intriguing premise. Sadly, it's mangled into an Omen-lite disaster area, thanks to a script torn between making a moral point about cloning and cheap shocks.
  26. 20
    Neither very scary nor very interesting, Godsend is an unresurrectable muddle.
  27. 20
    It mostly serves as a warning to stay away from future films involving director Nick Hamm and screenwriter Mark Bomback.
  28. 20
    The pivotal plot twist isn't hard to predict, and Brit theater vet Hamm and screenwriter Mark Bomback rely on jolts that date back to the silent era.
  29. 12
    Godsend makes swill of religion, science, family, and morality. It has the sensitivity of a cactus, the ingenuity of a square wheel, and the integrity of a CEO.
  30. Reviewed by: David Edelstein
    Turns into a pea-brained hodgepodge of "The Omen" (1976), "The Sixth Sense" (1999), and about 30 Grade-Z Bela Lugosi mad-scientist movies.
  31. Not just a bad thriller but also a thing of pain.
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 37 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 22
  2. Negative: 10 out of 22
  1. FelixQ.
    Jul 25, 2006
    For the most part, not terrible. It's a fair, if not wholely unique concept, and terrifically cast. It's not as bad as it's painted, it's really quite passable- a mid level thriller with the creepiest (I mean that in a good way!) child actor ever. I would've given it an 8, but really I expected more from the ending. As I said, the concept itself is intriguing if slightly over-used, but a great ending would've pulled this whole thing up. Full Review »
  2. Deluge
    Sep 18, 2005
    Godsend is a terrible thriller. It's not worth watching in theaters, not worth renting it on DVD not even worth watching it on channel 45 if it airs on tv. Full Review »