Critics’ reviews

Candyman (1992)

12 reviews from 12 publications. Critics’ score 75: 10 positive, 1 mixed, 1 negative.

Back to our review of Candyman

75
Positive
10
Mixed
1
Negative
1

Most critics find Candyman an intelligent, unsettling horror film, with ten of the twelve reviews leaning positive. Praise centres on Bernard Rose’s controlled direction and the atmosphere he builds around urban legends, race and class. Philip Glass’s score is a frequent point of agreement, while Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen draw praise for performances that give the supernatural threat weight. The favourable reviews see ideas beneath the shocks, particularly in the film’s treatment of fear and its Chicago setting.

The spread is wide, however, with reservations about plot coherence, pacing and the handling of racial themes. Some critics accept the ambiguities as part of the unease; others find the ideas inadequately developed. The New Yorker regards the racial material as an effective gimmick within a gory tale. The Los Angeles Times is the clearest dissenter, arguing that the gore overwhelms the film’s moral ambitions and that its story fails to hold together.

The Hollywood Reporter
14 September 1992 · THR Staff
90*

The review hails the film as high-caliber horror in its purest form, with a powerful and seductive Candyman portrayed by Tony Todd and strong performances from Virginia Madsen and others. It praises the taut direction, impressive bee effects, and Philip Glass score.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
★★★½/4 · Eric Henderson
88

The critic finds Bernard Rose's film a startlingly effective shocker that gains power on reflection, blending romanticism with dystopian elements and subtle political undercurrents around urban legends and race. It notes the systematic degradation of the protagonist amid strong performances.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Adam Smith
85*

The critic describes it as one of the most interesting and scary horror movies of the 90s that leaves a very dark taste in the mouth despite its sugary title. They single out the intelligent, challenging approach and the fantastic Philip Glass score.

Read the full review →
Time Out
27 May 2016 · NF
85*

Rose delivers a faithful, scary and visually imaginative adaptation of Barker's story about a doctoral student researching an urban myth that may be real. He stages the suspense and horror with skill and panache, resulting in one of the best sustained horror movies in years.

Read the full review →
Little White Lies
28 October 2018 · Anton Bitel
80*

Rose's adaptation relocates Clive Barker's story to Chicago's Cabrini-Green projects and explores boundaries of sex, class and race through a grad student's investigation of urban myths. The film offers unresolved narrative ambiguities and a haunting Philip Glass score that keep the myth alive.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · Alan Jones
80

Rose's electrifying shocker, inspired by Barker's story, follows a student uncovering a hook-handed killer linked to urban legends in Chicago. It is intelligent, gripping, gimmick-free and atmospheric, with a terrific performance from Madsen and bold direction that milks every terrifying moment.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
16 October 1992 · Roger Ebert
80*

The film uses urban legends to explore deeper fears and ideas rather than relying solely on gore. It is intriguing despite some plot elements that may not hold up under scrutiny.

Read the full review →
The Independent
21 March 1993
80*

The critic calls Candyman a triumph of directorial poise that becomes an essay on fear rather than a standard frightener. They single out its insight into the squalor of Chicago's projects and how it leaves viewers more fearful in the real world than in the cinema.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
16 October 1992 · Janet Maslin
70*

The horror unfolds provocatively against a backdrop of racial injustice in a housing project. The spooky atmosphere is enhanced by strong cinematography and score, with enterprising performances.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
19 October 1992
60*

The film cashes in on racial themes with its black Candyman in a Chicago project, using the gimmick effectively in satiric scenes. It remains just a gory campfire tale despite the slick savvy.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
16 October 1992 · Kevin Thomas
30*

The ambitious morality play drowns in repellent gore and becomes pretentious and preposterous. It fails to hold together despite efforts to cover moral, racial, and supernatural territory.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
1 June 2017 · Jennie Kermode
75*

The critic finds the film bold and unusual despite flaws in pacing and the ending. Strong performances, especially from Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen, along with Philip Glass's score and Bernard Rose's visual style, are singled out for praise.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate