StokerMovie Reviews

Stoker Showtimes + Tickets

Review This Movie

Go Based on 1,137 reviews
Breakdown:

Sort by: Helpfulness
Review Date

Oh No!
Written April 3, 2013
Stoker Stinks

by Jonire

The worse movie to be sure ever made by Nicole Kidman. When it was only myself and my friend in the theatre I should have known. The movie was so bad we got up and walked out. Save your $$$ not worth a Red Box 1.00 investment! Don't take the kids.... don't go!
- 7 out of 7 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Oh No!
Written March 23, 2013
Stoker

by blynnharris

4 people saw film and thought it was horrible. Acting was ok as was cinematography. Should not be seen by children, young adults or elderly. A must miss
- 8 out of 9 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Must Go!
Written March 28, 2013
A film lover's film

by divadcarroll

My buddy and I spent over 30 minutes discussing the movie afterwards. From the unique credits to the multiple visual layers to the deliberate development of the characters and plot we found ourselves completely engrossed in the film. We concluded we would catch even more if we saw it again.
- 7 out of 7 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
So-so
Written March 25, 2013
Virtually Suspenseless

by Cinebear

Weak in the plot department, good performances by Kidman and Wasikowska, but Goode lacked the charisma for the charismatic part... Just added up to very little at the end, although artfully done. I was hoping for more.
- 7 out of 7 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
No
Written March 3, 2013
All Style and No Substance

by pedsarq

This is a great looking movie. Unfortunately, the script is weak and that leaves the director with few options to carry the story to the end. You'll definitely get the feeling that some of the scenes are over-comptensating with gratuitous shots of blood spattering onto flowers expressionless faces. I can't recommend this movie to anyone.
- 7 out of 9 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Go
Written April 4, 2013
Nature or nurture? What may make a human commit muder?

by Squirrel Dude

I watched "Stoker" last week, and finally have the chance to say, I liked this movie! I had the choice to see this or "GI Joe." Speaking only for myself; I made the correct decision! This is an interesting story that unfolds. The movie's characters are played out quite good - two of the main characters are a little creepy. What makes a person commit, or want to commit violent crime (murder)? Are we born that way or do we learn it? Maybe it depends upon the person? Of course this film is merely fiction, but it's an interesting tale of human relationships (or lack of), psycho-sexual (deviant) development, and ethics/morality. Who among us is a sociopath? What secrets do some families have and hide?
- 4 out of 4 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Oh No!
Written March 12, 2013
HORROR FLICK NOT WORTH VIEWING, UNLESS YOU ARE IN NEED OF A NAP!

by Peneflix

It is March first and to this point ?Stoker? reigns as the worst film of 2013! How and why do beautiful, gifted actors prostitute their talents for detritus; meaningless, nonsensical scenarios? South Korean director Park Chan-Wook (?Oldboy?) fills a luscious, enchanting landscape with nothingness...
Saving the film from a zero rating is a daunting piano duet, composed by Philip Glass; seamlessly sensual, erotically enticing; fingers entwined, pulsating, caressing the keys, never has intimacy sounded more titillating, sublime, satiated...
ONE STAR!
For Now..Peneflix
***For full review please visit peneflix (dot) com!!!
- 7 out of 10 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Go
Written March 24, 2013
Stoker

by murphymcx

Absolutely not for all esp pre teens - but a well directed visually stunning movie. We acted and entertaining. Needs close attention and not a cookie cutter theme - so some will lose interst quickly - but for audiences that are willing to follow the visual clues - listen to the dialogue - and ignore the fact that there are no aliens - no star ships blowing up - and no hordes of zombies - this is a slick - grown up movie.
- 5 out of 6 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Go
Written March 28, 2013
dreamy munster family but spooky, not funny

by Seric26

Lots of creepy stuff here, beautifully shot. The trick is not to take it as realism; it may all be one unfolding dream, or told by unreliable narrators, or meant to be taken symbolically. The script is not as strong as the directing or acting, though it has some great ideas that aren't sufficiently developed. But Mia Wasikowska creates an indelible screen presence. She's sort of the same as she was in Jane Eyre, but if that little girl had been spoiled rather than sent to an orphange where she was taught how to behave. Like Jane, she has a crucible to navigate against the challenges of an irascible male and an unreliable female who are, in their ways, as complicated and dark as she is. Everyone else better just keep out of their archetypal paths of collision!
- 4 out of 4 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
No
Written March 31, 2013
The critics were right

by ron smith

This movie goes nowhere slowly with characters you don't care about and an unimaginative storyline. Definitely take a pass. And pass on the DVD as well.
- 4 out of 4 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Go
Written March 3, 2013
Psychosexual Thriller

by Jimmy George Jones

Very unusual, eerie and bizarre. All the main characters are off the wall. Reminded me of Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks. Artistic, dark, sexy, suspenseful and surreal all at the same time. Kudos to the director and cinematographer for their nigthmarish visionary flair.
- 6 out of 8 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Go
Written April 2, 2013
Like Fine Wine, You Have To Give This One A While To Breathe.

by Alon Patterson

To say this film starts slowly would be an gross understatement. At first I thought it might have been poorly edited, then minutes later I decided it was just "slow." Soon enough though, all started to become clearer. To say this film is unique would be wholly accurate. While it reminded me of horror thrillers of the late 70s/early 80s, it's unique and stands alone. Bearing the "Scott Free" logo and carrying the names of both Tony and Ridley Scott on the opening credits, one should be clued right away that all is not as it appears. That would indeed be the truth. Don't be misled though. This film is NOT for everyone. First and foremost, patience is the key. Next, one must be willing to be led, seduced into constant wonder, in order to truly enjoy this film. Finally, this one's not for the squeamish either. Given my previous admonitions, see it. You won't be disappointed.
- 4 out of 4 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
No
Written March 22, 2013
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE****SAVE YOUR MONEY

by sunshine1295

One of the worst movies I have seen in a very long time. Surprised Nicole Kidman took on such a stupid role. Slow, Slow and extremely weak story. Also, did I mention a stupid plot?
Save your money for Iron Man 3 to come.
- 4 out of 5 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
Go
Written March 26, 2013
Odd

by jhs39

Stylish and kinky thriller about a teen girl whose beloved father dies. Her Uncle Charlie (Shadow of a Doubt, anyone?) shows up at the funeral even though she didn't know her father had a brother. He proceeds to seduce her cold mother (Nicole Kidman) but it's clear from the start that his real target is his niece. And then people start disappearing. The first two thirds of this thriller is nearly perfect then a flashback scene comes showing where Charlie was a few days before the funeral. The scene is completely played wrong and makes his cool and unruffled exterior during the funeral and after seem more than a little implausible--in fact it makes pretty much everything you've seen up to that point seem highly improbable. With this scene Stoker loses its footing and never really recovers--the last 20 minutes or so are a silly and overwrought mess. It's too bad the filmmakers couldn't make the spell they cast for the first two thirds of the movie last all the way to the end.
- 4 out of 6 found this review helpful.
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No
I'm In
Written March 2, 2013
by stevenhoffman13
- Was this helpful to you?
- Yes
- No