My Soul to Take

Really, Wes? Really? This is the film you decided to make after not doing anything for 5 years ... Stop trying to redo Nightmare on Elm Street you DINKUS. You will laugh a lot during this though, 70 year old men writing teenage characters lolol

The Riverton Ripper makes it sound like Shaggy and Scooby-Doo taught Archie and Jughead how to make a bong.

The idea is so amazingly uninspired that I brushed it off, thinking it'd be complete rubbish, but in fact it's Craven's best effort in over a decade. It's still not a great movie, but as far as slashers go, yeah it doesn't really make sense, it's cliched, and it's not winning any awards, but the body count is good enough, the thrills (although minor) are there, and it simply doesn't suck enough to stick in the pack of every other slasher in the past thirty years.

An unmitigated disaster.

Doesn't make any sense at all and when they try to explain it the film really suffers. That said, it's pretty entertaining at times and has some decent kills which is all you can really ask for with this type of film. The dialogue is horrendous and frustrated me throughout the runtime. I could see this becoming a cult classic if more people see it, but really not worth watching unless you need to kill some time.

I don't believe Wes Craven did this!

Oh dear. Shit film. Beyond shit. I just.....Yeah. It was horrible.

What a weird, confused little movie.

A surprisingly sleek teen slasher with a few polished moments that make it every-so-slightly better than average. Despite those few tweaks, and some surprising character deaths, it doesn't stray far enough from formula to be anything but polished slop. Even so, I liked enough of the humor and the stoic theming to find it really enjoyable.

It tried to develop some of the main characters more than the typical slasher horror, and made them do stuff other than just party and gossip at the beginning. So a few points for efforts. But otherwise it was not super good and I dozed through parts of it. Some of the actors were bad, some tired plot...

Why did no one tell Wes Craven that high school kids don't still do "show and tell?" Some of the worst pacing and editing I've seen in quite some time and terrible dialogue like "this is for shut the fuck up" delivered as a COOL one-liner. The jock bully guy looks the exact same as both of the "nerd" kids and I couldn't tell any of them apart, and Craven made the blind kid shout "I'm blind!" in his first scene because there wasn't any other possible way to convey that information.

48.2.

Craven's experimental slasher is also one of his most personal films. The masked killer here is an entity that possessed a man 16 years ago and comes back to haunt his town and the seven teenagers that were born on the same day he was allegedly dead. Plot might seem convoluted at times, but this is engaging to the last shot. The first ten minutes are one of the best things Craven has ever shot.

(Viewed on 28/06/11): Reality check: Craven is not, and was never, a true master of horror. He made some influential films, but unlike his peers like Carpenter and Argento, or older masters like Bava, his formal skills were seriously lacking. Moreover, as good as A Nighmare On Elm Street is, it isn't on the same level as Halloween, Suspiria, Nosferatu or any other classic horror you can name. M.S.T.T is basically Craven paying tribute to himself and the results are as dire as that idea suggests.

I'd love to write 500 characters about this movie, but with a film that gives you no interesting characters to even think about it doesn't seem fair to return the favour. Bad, bad, bad movie. Don't.

37.000

After loads of awfully scripted waffle the slashing begins but, I'd already lost interest by then, poor.

An interesting setting with some concepts that could be put to good use... but all was wasted

Horrible dialogue, lousy performances, and so many moments that had no business being in a movie that wasn't a spoof! It was an interesting concept, but delivered so poorly that I can't forgive anyone who was involved.

My Soul to Take isn't a good horror film, nor is it an enjoyable slasher. It has an uninteresting villain, a plot that we've seen dozens of times before, archetypal characters, no scares and absolutely nothing fun. It also has a solid cast and I didn't hate many of the characters -- I actually hoped for some of them to make it to the end of this movie. It just isn't a good horror film, and definitely not a return to form for Wes Craven. This is the film he loved to poke fun at years earlier.

Laughable dialogue and premises.

In case you're curious if it's really that bad -- yes, it's pretty bad. Not the worst, but nothing I'd recommend. Terrible acting and dialogue; just another one of those churned-out Wes Craven slashers with no real originality or creativity behind out.

Blunt, dull and frustrating.

37.000

Wes is falling.

Unintentionally hilarious (or was it intentional?!?!?!?!?)

Bad Movie

It's not that bad, but it's "revelation" and the half a dozen plots and subplots that just get ignored in the end are so nonsensical that in the end you just understand why it got trashed so hard.

Could have been a beter movie... the story line is not bad...

Wes Craven was trying so desperately to create a brand new faceless masked murdering soul that he ended up with non coherent, shattered and common old formula which did not work in any level.

Apparently done with his failed jabs at being ironic, Craven returns to just the plain old formula of the nonsensical masked slasher picking off a bunch of vapid teens one by one, adding only a corny twist or two just to make it stupider.

REVIEW TO DO

"That Craven is earnestly trying to make an on-the-level, snark-free horror flick signals a welcome sea change in his career." - Simon Abrams