Metascore
25

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 13 Critics What's this?

User Score
4.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 53 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , , ,
  • Summary: Adam "Bug" Heller was supposed to die on the bloody night his father went insane. Unaware of his dad's terrifying crimes, he has been plagued by nightmares since he was a baby. But if Bug hopes to save his friends from the monster that's returned, he must face an evil that won't rest... until it finishes the job it began the day he was born. (Rogue Pictures) Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 13
  2. Negative: 8 out of 13
  1. There are plenty of formulaic boo! moments, yet Craven intelligently treats Bug's otherworldly issues like hormonal growing pains that must be tamed.
  2. 50
    The picture is directed with such a loose, slack hand that you'd think Craven had never directed a slasher-thriller before: I didn't jump once; I never even felt vaguely scared or creeped out.
  3. Dull, talk-heavy snoozer that most closely resembles something that would show up on the CW network.
  4. Sadly, there's not an ounce of tension or a single decent scare to be found amid any of this convoluted mayhem.
  5. 30
    All might be good for a flask-to-the-theater laugh, if not for the unconscionable price gouging.
  6. 25
    I watched at least a quarter of My Soul to Take, the worst horror movie Wes Craven's made perhaps ever, with the glasses off. It was shot - and is available - in a standard format, and, like many conversions, the 3-D gimmick is like watching a movie through an ashtray.
  7. 0
    This utterly mediocre forget-me-now could've been crafted by any faceless serial director at all. The shame of it is that the man behind the camera is Wes Craven when, by all rights, it should have been Alan Smithee.

See all 13 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 26
  2. Negative: 14 out of 26
  1. Oct 24, 2010
    10
    Ok, i'm seriously disillusioned by the bad hype given by critics for this film. I watched this film minus any expectations, except that it would have a Craven touch to it. I walked from the theater smiling, while slightly jaded by the totally unnecessary use of "3-D" in the film (jackass 3d used it more effectively, ha), i was impressed and deeply entertained by the self-referential and retro feel of this silly sleazy slick horror film. It's a given that every cliche in slasher-film history is at dispense, but Craven has damn fun with this. I immediately felt like I was watching an 80s slasher with a modern production aesthetic and a smirky, nearly slapstick attitude. The unknown cast confidently portrayed a delicious slew of campy horror cliche characters in a manner that felt fresh and well timed. I laughed more in the theater (as did the thin audience) than feeling any true sense of dread or nervousness, but that seemed to not be the focus of this 'scary' movie. If you appreciate 'B' horror films (mainly from the 80s slasher variety) Craven's direction will tease and delight you with its silliness, but tantalize you with its freshly cut violent scenes. Seriously though! I was shocked to see how negatively this film has been discussed. Come on people, open up to the true fun of camp. And not camp by way of poor piss acting, uneven pacing, asinine storytelling, and just bad production values... this is creamy classy camp love project from Wes Craven... it's silly cast is quite quotable to boot! It seems like most reviewers/critics of this film have missed the point, and disregarded the slick, fun production Craven crafted for this popcorn experience. 3D was added after filming and was totally unnecessary though, but the movie was worth my $12.50, maybe another. Expand
  2. Oct 9, 2010
    10
    A mish-mash celluloid mess! Not the least bit scary or frightening! ANOTHER HUGE MIS-USE OF 3D! COME ON, FILMMAKERS! NOT EVERY MOVIE HAS TO BE IN 3D! CAN'T EVEN TELL THIS ONE IS 3D! Expand
  3. Jul 8, 2013
    9
    Despite receiving a lot of criticism I still thoroughly enjoyed this creepy little Thriller from Wes Craven, and its now the second time I've seen it. Perfect film to get you thinking also as it's a mysterious Thriller where you need to guess who the killer might be, similar to 'Scream' films. A great group of young actors and characters, as well as having some jumpy moments. The best thing was it held your interest the whole way through, and if you have the DVD check out the alternate endings! Expand
  4. May 29, 2011
    3
    With a very interesting theme, developed till a part of the film correctly, but almost vanished at the end. Bug is an extremely cute guy, whose gives you the idea of the most innocent person in the world and that further ahead if it makes us rethink is so innocent. The main idea is quite different, multiple souls instead of multiple personalities with a touch of mystical and supernatural to spice up the story had everything to be perfect, but with the progress the plot began to seem too predictable and almost half of the film, as gives notice to the entire plot of intrigue, which makes them lose all the suspense and grace of figure that out in the end. In short, it's a good movie, could have been better if directed it better, really disappointed with Wes Craven. Expand
  5. Jul 1, 2013
    2
    Holy cow was this movie bad. It uses the stupidest clichés in the stupidest ways possible. There's no tension, not a single scary moment, and it's painful to sit through. Wes Craven made this? I don't get how you can be the man who supposedly tore clichés apart with Scream, I haven't seen it yet), and still make crap like this. Every single moment which is supposed to be scary is hilarious, and you can tell it wasn't purposefully done that way either. The two leads could have been good in a well written movie, but no one can emerge from this unscathed. I can go on forever about how bad this film is, but that would be a waste of time. Just don't see it. Expand
  6. Oct 13, 2010
    2
    Remember any of the Freddy Kruger movies, or Wes Craven's New Nightmare? Well, here is Craven's newest movie, one that focuses on a psychotic serial killer named, "The Ripper," who stalks this town killing tons of people. The movie opens up in a blur of blood and a ton of graphic violence as The Ripper is almost apprehended, and then it skips sixteen years to a group of friends who are initiating a new member, Bug, into their group. From there on, the movie turns into a gorefest lounging by a pool of blood, as people are gutted, slashed, and smashed in brutally graphic scenes. And yet, the movie still maintains some horror, though it could do a lot better if it just chose a genre already (Slasher flick? Horror movie? Make up your damn mind!). And the ending, god the ending just sucks. Instead of ending it in a dreary, dark tone (Which would've made the movie much better.) Craven decided he wanted it to be a happy, great ending scene. It'll have you shaking your head and walking out feeling disappointed. Also, there are a ton of loose ends that never get tied up. For one, what was up with this demonic crap anyways? At times in the movie people start talking all creepy and deep, like any other horror flick possessed person, yet that is never mentioned. You'd think they'd at least try to give it a crappy explanation. Honestly, I can't recommend this movie, just go watch Nightmare on Elm Street. Expand
  7. Oct 9, 2010
    0
    Please do not let the words 'Wes Craven' convince you to go to this movie. It's easily the worst horror film i've ever seen, and I'm a fan of horror movies, having seen all the cheesy ones like 2001 Maniacs and Return of the Living Dead up through all the classic ones like Halloween and Friday the 13th. The dialogue in this film, particularly towards the end, just starts to crumble with lines like 'fly away Condor' or eagle or whatever it was that the pathetic imagery was supposed to evoke. The film really unravels after The Stepfather-esque opening and just gets worse from there. There are no 3D effects to speak of in this movie, so if you wasted your $13 or so on the 3D version, please accept my humble condolence. I remember a few years back there was this horror movie called One Missed Call, which was a remake of an earlier film, where there was this housekeeper named Rosa. That movie, too, was a real stinkfest, but at least at one point in the film when Rosa gets the knife, an audience member said loudly 'Poor Rosa' and we all laughed because we knew we'd been suckered into a slick marketing campaign for a terrible film. In My Soul to Take, there's no such luck. There are no laughable audience-inspired dialogue moments. The whole movie is just a complete tank. Go see something else instead and wait with baited breath for the critical trashing of this movie to commence. It's well-deserved. I give this movie a 0 simply to honor the $13.50 I lost at the box office on it. At least the popcorn was good, though! Expand

See all 26 User Reviews

Trailers

Related Articles

  1. Ranked: Wes Craven's Best and Worst Movies

    Ranked: Wes Craven's Best and Worst Movies Image
    Published: October 21, 2010
    Just in time for Halloween, our week of horror-related articles kicks off with a look at the career of one of the genre's most prolific directors, Wes Craven.