Clayface (2026)

The critic calls the film a big bet that pays off, praising its body-horror thrills and emotional depth. He especially singles out the practical effects and a tense sequence aboard an airplane.

The review presents the film as a gory, ghoulish superhero movie with unusually effective body horror. It singles out the icky body horror as the film’s standout quality.

Lodge finds the film an enjoyable, self-contained horror romp that succeeds without relying on franchise connections. He especially praises its inspired practical effects and stomach-churning body-horror setpieces.

Cole finds the film a surprisingly sturdy, compelling horror-thriller and a brilliant setup for a Batman update. He praises its shifting, visibly artificial Gotham, which gives the city an atmosphere of active malevolence.

Hassenger finds the film a decent, workmanlike monster B-movie rather than a major horror success. He praises its clever use of shadows and cuts to portray Clayface’s transformations, while faulting the body horror for lacking visceral impact.

The review finds the film shallow but entertaining, with its brutal body horror delivering despite limited thematic depth. It praises Tom Rhys Harries’s lead performance and James Watkins’s visceral practical effects and transformations.

Erbland calls the film an ambitious misfire that confounds more than it compels. She praises its commitment to body horror and highlights the gruesome airplane sequence, while criticizing muddy effects and plotting.

The critic finds the film an uneven but entertaining horror experiment, with a safe script and shallow themes holding it back. They praise Tom Rhys Harries’s performance and the squeamish effects, especially the Vesuvius nightclub sequence.

The headline presents the film as an edgy but predictable body-horror spin-off. It singles out predictability as a drawback; the full review is inaccessible.

Lee finds the film a middling, clumsily executed attempt that fails to make its story or Gotham setting compelling. He praises the intimate body-horror moments, especially the scene of Matt trying to cut through flesh growing over his eyes.

Marric finds the film a gamble that pays off, praising its effective body horror and pulpy spirit. She especially singles out Tom Rhys Harries’s performance as the film’s standout.

The critic finds the genre-driven origin story entertaining and worth seeing, especially for horror fans. They praise James Watkins’s jump-scares and graphic body-horror sequences.

Knight praises the film as a magnificent, boundary-pushing horror triumph with an empathetic heart. She especially singles out its precisely controlled gore and the performances of Tom Rhys Harries and Naomi Ackie.

Moss finds the film most successful as gleefully gross body horror, while its thin characters and procedural-feeling dialogue weaken the story. She praises the inventive effects and dynamic, grotesque action sequences.

Miller finds Clayface an effective, freaky standalone horror film, though its character work feels surface-level and its place in DC’s larger universe is unclear. She praises the gruesome horror sequences and shapeshifting set pieces, especially their convincing practical-effects magic.

The critic finds it an effective, moderately successful monster movie, though not a great or especially original one. The gross-out effects and inventive moments of bodily horror are its main strengths.

The critic finds the film shapeless and underwhelming, though ultimately fine. They praise Tom Rhys Harries’s performance and single out the gory, transforming nightclub sequence as memorable.

Perez finds the film visually striking but emotionally misjudged, with its tragedy undermined by tonal confusion. He praises the grotesque, convincing visual effects, while faulting their use for turning intended emotional moments into unintended comedy.

The critic finds the film underwhelming overall despite its distinctive horror elements. They praise its commitment to body horror and Tom Rhys Harries’s lead performance.

The critic finds the film dull and disappointing, with no compelling character to root for. They praise its gross body-horror moments but say it never becomes genuinely frightening.