Mixed or average reviews - based on 42 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 42
  2. Negative: 4 out of 42
  1. Reviewed by: Michael O'Sullivan
    Mar 14, 2013
    Stoker plays out like a Kabuki “Macbeth”: gallons of style slathered on a story you already know by heart.
  2. Reviewed by: Andrew O'Hehir
    Feb 28, 2013
    Stoker, which plays something like a remake of “The Addams Family” mixed with “The Paperboy” — but without the laughs of either – belongs in a special category of movie badness, or perhaps two different but overlapping categories. It’s a visually striking but fundamentally terrible film made by a good or (some would say) great director.
  3. Reviewed by: Mick LaSalle
    Mar 14, 2013
    The movie reveals itself as not merely dull, but pointless.
  4. Reviewed by: Rodrigo Perez
    Feb 5, 2013
    The risible Stoker is a brutally empty, deeply unfortunate movie, and Park Chan-wook's jackhammer of a tool he calls a brush is, on this evidence, something that should be locked away.
User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 120 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 32
  2. Negative: 7 out of 32
  1. Jun 29, 2013
    Stoker has a first rate art direction and an exquisite editing with an astonishing soundtrack and a great cast but a ridden of cliches and a third rate, tired and unoriginal plot that is pointless and dumb. This thriller is gruesome and it is not everyone's cup of tea, although it looks spellbinding and delightful, it is a dull, disturbing and an uneven experience in so many ways. Full Review »
  2. May 12, 2013
    Is very strange and is not commercial. Is very Well acted and is fun. The images are very beautiful and psychological terror. Is very paused and sometimes is erotic Full Review »
  3. Mar 1, 2013
    It's safe to say that fans of the Director will be pleased but so wil regular audiences as well. This is a GREAT thriller which is simultaneous vividly stunning with excellent performances. Look for this to steal some Oscars next year. Full Review »