59
Metascore
9 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- 80EmpireIan NathanEmpireIan NathanGenuinely creepy, satirical and occasionally daft horror tales with a distinctly moral bent.
- 75Chicago Sun-TimesRoger EbertChicago Sun-TimesRoger EbertWhat they've done here is to recapture not only the look and the storylines of old horror comics, but also the peculiar feeling of poetic justice that permeated their pages. In an EC horror story, unspeakable things happened to people - but, for the most part, they deserved them.
- 75Miami HeraldBill CosfordMiami HeraldBill CosfordThe film has fun. In a way, Creepshow is a horror for grownups. It is grownups, after all, who understand that horror stories must be fun; if they're not, then they're just horrifying, and who wants that? [15 Nov 1982, p.D3]
- 70Washington PostRita KempleyWashington PostRita KempleyMost of the time Creepshow works.
- 63The Globe and Mail (Toronto)Jay ScottThe Globe and Mail (Toronto)Jay ScottCreepshow is probably not everything the fans of each horrormeister hoped it would be (it is not, for example, in the same league as Cavalcanti's great anthology film, Dead of Night), but it's probably enough.[10 Nov 1982]
- 50TV Guide MagazineTV Guide MagazineKing's stories are nothing special, and with the exception of the final entry, nothing in the film is particulary scary.
- 40The New York TimesVincent CanbyThe New York TimesVincent CanbyThe best things about Creepshow are its carefully simulated comic-book tackiness and the gusto with which some good actors assume silly positions. Horror film purists may object to the levity even though failed, as a lot of it is.
- 40NewsweekDavid AnsenNewsweekDavid AnsenRomero and King want to be as unsophisticated as possible, while maintaining a sense of humor, and they succeed all too well. The characters, story lines and images are studiously one-dimensional. For anyone over 12 there's not much pleasure to be had watching two masters of horror deliberately working beneath themselves. Creepshow is a faux naif horror film: too arch to be truly scary, too elemental to succeed as satire. [22 Nov 1982, p.118]