Metascore
17

Overwhelming dislike - based on 12 Critics What's this?

User Score
4.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 203 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring:
  • Summary: Donna's senior prom is supposed to be the best night of her life. After surviving a horrible tragedy, she has finally moved on and is enjoying her last year of high school. Surrounded by her best friends, she should be safe from the horrors of her past. But when the night turns deadly, there is only one person who could be responsible...a man she thought was gone forever. Now, Donna and her friends must find a way to escape the sadistic rampage of an obsessed killer, and survive a night "to die for." (Sony Pictures) Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 12
  2. Negative: 9 out of 12
  1. Reviewed by: Joe Leydon
    70
    A surprisingly effective teen-skewing thriller that soft-pedals graphic violence (in marked contrast to the R-rated 1980 original) while generating a fair degree of suspense.
  2. 50
    Formulaic to the core, this reworking of the fondly remembered high-school slasher picture works surprisingly well on its own terms.
  3. Without the gore, this old school slasher rehash is one anemic bore.
  4. The movie offers less gore than the average Band-Aid commercial and fewer scares than the elimination episodes of "Dancing With the Stars."
  5. 20
    McCormick and screenwriter J.S. Cardone don’t have one original thought between them, but they do appear to share an obsession with characters opening hotel-room closets in which the steel hangers gleam ominously.
  6. 16
    There's really nothing much to Prom Night: No twists, no atmosphere, no big Grand Guignol setpieces, not a single moment when it tries to do something novel with the event, the killings, the villain, or the victims. It's a little like going on a tour of the slaughterhouse, where death is meted out with mechanical regularity, but visitors are kept at a safe, PG-13 distance from all the butchering.
  7. 0
    A nearly bloodless slasher film with fewer surprises than a broken jack-in-the-box.

See all 12 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 43
  2. Negative: 26 out of 43
  1. Jun 3, 2012
    10
    This Is A Really Scary Movie!
    Good Writing, And Good Acting I'm Not Sure What's So Bad About This Movie??
  2. Sep 25, 2012
    5
    A movie to hang out with your friends ... has an unoriginal plot and the movie gets a bit boring as move through the movie. The only thing I liked about the movie was how well acted the protagonist. Expand
  3. Apr 13, 2013
    3
    Not scary in the slightest and not gory in the slightest. What happened!!!!!!!!!! This could have been horror gold but it was a horrible bore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The characters are stooped and the plot is stooped. Other than the good soundtrack and the occasional entertaining moments, what good can I say? All this movie is is one teen goes missing, another teen goes looking for them and gets killed. Another teen goes missing, and another one goes looking for them and gets killed. That's the whole plot. It didn't have to be below decent standards but I guess the producers will throw anything together for money these days. Bummer. Expand
  4. Sep 11, 2010
    2
    You call this a horror? I'm not terrified. A cheesy teen movie. I do more adore Final Destination than this movie it's less effective movie for me. It's less horrifying. I hope there was much horror. BOO! on Brittany's act! Expand
  5. Aug 27, 2011
    2
    So bad it's good, but not good enough to watch it. It's a good first date movie, when you're seeing someone so amazing you know you won't be able to focus on the movie. Expand
  6. Nov 19, 2010
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Degrades from a terrible mess to a terrible, useless pile of complete and utter dog poo where the most beautiful, most promising woman dies first, a 30-year-old madman kills a dozen people without so much as breaking a sweat, and the lead spends half the movie under a bed. Half an hour in, youâ Expand
  7. Dec 21, 2011
    0
    Wow. I've seen a lot of slasher flicks, and I am not exaggerating when I say that this is the worst slasher flick I have ever seen, hands-down, bar none. There are so many critically bad things about it that the movie is doomed from the start. One: The villain is a totally not-scary nobody whose motivation boils down to "I'm a psychopath with an ex I want back so I'm going to kill everyone even remotely connected to her." That's it. That's all you get about him. Not one detail is ever added. The character himself is useless, far from clever, and does nothing except stab people when they're alone, all practically identically, and often in dark rooms. How exciting. Two: Look, I know the police have to be somewhat incompetent in slasher films, or almost any film, so the bad guys at least look like they have a chance. I get that. Police procedure is invariably thrown out the window in films like this. But there's a certain line when incompetence reaches full-on idiocy to level 11. The police in this film somehow decide it's best to not let the main target of her homicidal stalker know she's being targeted, nor anyone else at the prom, because they're trying to be nice and think they can stop the guy without her knowing, thus letting her have a great prom night without knowing *THERE'S A HOMICIDAL PSYCHOPATH HUNTING HER AND HER FRIENDS*. This is while he's upstairs killing hotel staff, by the way. While the police are busy talking about nothing, our villain is literally just walking around and stabbing anyone he comes into contact with. I mean, I'm not a cop, but I think it might be smart to at least keep an eye on his main target and the room she's staying in...Nah, forget that, let's just let him roam free and wait until 90 minutes are up. Police procedure is not only ignored, but burned alive at the stake as the police do stunningly stupid things repeatedly with totally warped logic, and also unbelievable disregard for effective protect-the-target procedure. They don't even try, even when they know for a fact he's on his way for her. They actually let her stay alone in her room with *one* police car outside. In the real world, if there's domestic violence, you get about a dozen cops at one time. If it's a homicide, you get every policeman within thirty miles covering the town and its exits. Finally, in a twist that's the least surprising of any movie ever, the killer doesn't wait for them to do...whatever it is they're doing, and starts killing almost everyone, including armed police, without a single instance of being threatened until the natural conclusion, when he simply...well, it's not like it matters, but let's just say it's not exactly epic, and the movie just ends. Also, the only weapon he ever uses is a pocket knife. There are drug dealers in suburbs more armed than this guy, and probably just as clever. Three: Every single thing you need to know about the plot, the killer, the victim, the characters, the motivation, and even the plan of the killer, is all revealed in the first ten minutes of the film. I don't know about you, but I kind of like suspense in my slashers. Character development is also a plus, as is the occasional mysterious motive or some kind of added story element that turns things around a little bit to mean something new. This film doesn't even bother with that. Not one thing changes from the first ten minutes on, and we are literally watching things play out *exactly as the introduction says it will*. You might be better off skipping the first ten minutes or so so it doesn't spoil itself for you. There are no surprises to speak of. Four: The PG-13 rating (which, by the way, isn't helped in the unrated) makes it so anyone out for blood spurting is out of luck. There's almost no blood at all in any of the killings, and the PG-13 limit of violence isn't even pushed. Five: I might be crazy, but if there's multiple bodies, a homicidal maniac, and police officers dead, all while this guy is clearly looking for his main target, why do they not have her surrounded by officers with automatic weapons at all times, rather than letting her sit in her room for him to simply walk into--which is exactly what he does? It's as if everyone's trying to get stabbed to death here by a villain that is impossible to be frightened of, being no smarter or well-armed than a coke peddler. He's just a guy with a knife, and no more. So we've got a film here that does not work on any level whatsoever. It's so incredibly stupid and bloodless, there is literally no reason to watch this film, unless you just want to appreciate your copy of Swimfan more. Possibly the least entertaining slasher in the last decade. Expand

See all 43 User Reviews

Trailers

Related Articles

  1. Ranked: Best and Worst Remakes of the Past Decade

    Ranked: Best and Worst Remakes of the Past Decade Image
    Published: August 16, 2011
    This Friday brings remakes of "Conan the Barbarian" and "Fright Night" to theaters. Just how good (and bad) can a remake possibly be? We take a look at examples of both extremes released since 2000.