My Soul to Take
When the Riverton Ripper vanished, 7 children were born. Now they're turning 16, and turning up dead. Wes Craven (Scream) keeps your heart racing in this terrifying suspense-thriller.
© 2010 Rogue Pictures. All Rights Reserved.
- buy from $9.99
Lots of bloody slashing in Wes Craven's violent chiller.
what parents need to know
what families can talk about
Tomatometer®reviews counted: 11see all My Soul to Take reviews
Top Critic Reviews
Rotten: Wes Craven's first new movie in five years is a brainless, joyless, and yes, you might even say, soulless teen slasher.
- Adam Markovitz, Entertainment Weekly, Friday, October 8, 2010
Rotten: This dumb, derivative teen slasher movie would be uninspiring coming from any writer-director, let alone one with several genre classics under his belt.
- Dennis Harvey, Variety, Friday, October 8, 2010
Rotten: What sinks it is Craven's simplistic, ham-fisted writing and inert direction.
- Eric D. Snider, Film.com, Monday, October 11, 2010
I think 2010 has found its worst flick. We can all agree that 2010 has had its ups and downs with film but "My Soul to Take" makes me want to give every movie I've seen this year four stars or higher. Why? It's got worse acting, writing, and story than a SCI-FI channel original TV movie. The one question that ran through my mind while watching this movie was: "Wes, what were you thinking?" I mean, seriously, what was he thinking? The movie does make sense, somewhat, but, this is the corniest, most terrible horror story ever created. Not just because it's incredibly cheesy but because it's so damn pointless and nobody cares about the story whatsoever. I think Wes tries way to hard coming up with another classic and I feel as if he used a lot of elements in this that relate a little too much to "A Nightmare on Elm Street". The only difference is that this movie sucks. "Vampires Suck" had more meaning than this. All I can say is please do not waste your money on this movie. It isn't worth a penny. Skip this for the sake of your time. Let's just all hope "Scream 4" isn't this bad. If there is anything worse than the film's acting or story idea, its definitely the writing. Wes Craven puts together such a messy, horribly dialoged script. This has got to be Craven's worst. I'd say by a land-slide. Not just was the writing horrible, but he got of at least have came up with some creative kill scenes. All of the deaths in this movie are so dull and none of them actually grab the viewer. This isn't the least bit scary. I think he just made this to make this. I hope Wes comes out and states that he only spent three days on this script and then never did re-takes. At least then I wouldn't wonder what made him do such a terrible job with this. Max Theriot, you may remember him from "The Pacifier", I can't think of him being in anything else, although, I'm sure he has been around since then. Well, let me say this nicely, he sucked in this. He was so terrible putting this character to life. I mean, he did have to work with a crappy script, but still, he wasn't even a little good. The same goes for everyone else in this movie. Zena Gray was bad, Denzel Whitaker....the list goes on! I might as well just end the review here because I have nothing good to say about this movie, but, I'll continue with my usual review format. I already mentioned how this was Craven's worst so that probably goes for his direction too. I mean, he isn't a bad director but why did he have to make this in 3D? This movie being in 3D was so pointless. This isn't one of those flicks that needs to be in the 3D format. If you are still going to see this movie even after my review, then please don't spend the extra four bucks on 3D. How about this, at least do me the favor of waiting for this to enter a 3 Dollar theatre. Well, I'll end here. Please, oh, please skip this movie. Its horribly written, acted, and directed. It has one of the worst twists ever. The twist wasn't even "twist" material. The movie has some un-creative kills for a horror story and I felt like I was watching a comedy most of the time because this was so damn silly. This movie is a major skip.
- TheCuckooBird, Saturday, October 23, 2010
Bug: If something dead was evil enough, do you think it could come back to life? Wes Craven deserves some kind of recognition this year. Despite having to suffer through such duds as The Last Airbender, Jonah Hex, and even a remake of Craven's own horror classic A Nightmare On Elm Street, somehow, Craven has managed to write and direct the worst film of the year, which is the best thing I can say about My Soul to Take. I am not one to be caught up in the star ratings I assign to movies, but while I may give only so many movies five stars, it is definitely rarer for me to give a movie half of a star. It is not something I take joy in; really, it just makes me sad. Attempting to summarize this ridiculously convoluted plot may be difficult, but I will attempt to try. Sixteen years ago, a serial killer, known as the Ripper, was on the loose in the town of Riverton. The Ripper turned out to be a schizophrenic psychopath who was caught (right after he killed his pregnant wife) and presumably killed on the same day that seven children were born. Jumping ahead to the present, on the day of those seven teen's birthdays, there is a legend that The Ripper's soul, or maybe even the Ripper himself, will kill those born on the day of his death, unless they all do some kind of random ritual to stop this. Unfortunately, our lead character, Bug (Max Thierot), who suffers from migraines and has horrible nightmares (guess why), was too scared to go through with the made up ritual. Seemingly, as a result, the next day consists of a series of mysterious murders, one by one, of those who were born on that day. The question is who is behind these murders? Has the Ripper come back? Has his soul? Or has Bug lost it completely? I had to chop out so many other elements involving this story. These include the many ways the Ripper can apparently be deflected, the many subplots involving the teen characters, including a bully who takes orders from Bug's sister (???), an abusive stepfather, a super Christian girl and her meetings with the Principal's pregnant daughter, a blind kid who can sneak into houses, and Bug's apparent supernatural abilities. The story is horrendously bad and is a very poor attempt to make something more out of what could be a simple "creepy killer living under the bridge" story. And then things got worse... Apparently, without Scream's screenwriter, Kevin Williamson, Craven has no finger anywhere near the pulse of teen culture. The script is lousy. Characters speak in ways that only deliver either exposition (which as you can tell by these plot points, there is way to much of) or in ways that I could only think is some even grander form of irony that reflects on the ways clever scripts reflect on older scripts, which puts this one full circle and back in the land out terrible screenwriting. Here is one of the gems of dialogue presented: Fang: Wake up and smell the Starbucks. Helping deliver this dialogue are the many bland teenagers cast in these parts. Unlike, say Heather Langencamp and Johnny Depp from the original Nightmare on Elm Street, none of these actors standout a bit, with the exception of Bug, since he is the one person we have to follow throughout this movie. If the story was less of a mess, I might have been able to give credit to some of the work Thierot did, but as it stands, the kid just seems weirdly inconsistent. I would try to point out the comic relief character in this film, except the dialogue said made me think every character was comic relief. Oh, and this is a horror movie by the way. Not sure if that was communicated, but this film does not really make that apparent either. Somehow, the work by Craven in the past to create films that rely on tension and suspense (including the Scream films, despite being satires on the genre) is absent here. Sadly relying on jump scares, including several uses of the ol' mirror trick, this movie could have been called My Soul to BOO! Of course, if the film wasn't so incredibly boring, these might have at least had an effect. Finally, adding more insult to injury, Wes decided to jump on the 3D...scratch that, fake 3D band wagon, by converting this film to feature that format. It goes without saying that wearing sunglasses to a movie was once again not something that enhanced the picture for me. This film was terrible in every way. While I can give some films more of a pass because less experienced filmmakers were behind them, people like Shyamalan and here - Wes Craven, should know better. I am not sure what will be in store for audiences when Scream 4 comes out, but if it makes fun of this movie and movies like it, that would be a good joke, a good of a joke as this film is. Bug: Now I lay me down to sleep. I pray to the Lord, my soul to... Me: Oh my god, again with this!?!
- DrZeek, Friday, October 8, 2010
Just utter madness, I couldn't tell what Wes Craven had concocted. It's one of the most bizarre and awkwardly funny horror movies. Unlike Drag Me To Hell, it's never quite clear if you're supposed to be laughing with or at the movie. The characters are like a breakfast club for horror, with a Daredevil in the group for shear confusion. The one thing I really will say is ingenious is the unpredictable and relentless nature of the killings, you really never know who'll get taken by the swap demon ripper. The 3D in this movie is the tip of the iceberg, it makes zero sense. Nothing was used in 3D at all, which matches the confusion of the movie I guess.
- ythelastman89, Friday, October 8, 2010