The Strangers Prequel Panned by Critics

Maybe you should stay home.

By Cameron Bonomolo

"Because you were home" was shocking justification for a deadly home invasion in 2008's The Strangers — but it sounds like critics can't justify a less-scary retread. Critics have published their reviews for The Strangers: Chapter 1, the first in a simultaneously-shot Strangers prequel trilogy slashed into three parts. The horror-thriller, from filmmaker Renny Harlin (A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master, Exorcist: The Beginning), debuted Thursday at 21% "rotten" on Rotten Tomatoes — lower than the original (49%) and its decade-later standalone sequel, The Strangers: Prey at Night (40%).

In the new movie, a young couple (Riverdale's Madelaine Petsch and Cruel Summer's Froy Gutierrez) is forced to spend the night in a remote cabin after their car breaks down in an eerie small town. Panic ensues as they're terrorized by three masked strangers who strike with no mercy and seemingly no motive, beginning a cat-and-mouse game that will unfold over an entire trilogy.

Chapter 1 "serves as little more than a rehash of the original movie that not only fails to replicate what made that film work, but also actively made decisions that resulted in a distinct step backward for the series," ComicBook's Patrick Cavanaugh writes in a 2/5 review, calling the slasher "redundant" and a "rudimentary rehash of plot points from the original movie."

"We had to keep in mind that this is one story arc. It is one 4.5 hour movie, and the first movie is a first act," Harlin told ComicBook. "It sets up the characters, and the terror, and the killers, and our main character, who will survive the first movie, but then go on a journey for the next two."

But is The Strangers: Chapter 1 all set up and no payoff? Here's what critics are saying:

Deadline: "The Strangers: Chapter 1 is everything wrong in the horror genre. The film suffers from zero build-up, a lack of atmospheric tension, and an overreliance on cheap jump scares. The characters make a series of poor decisions, a hallmark of lazy writing that propels the plot forward with little regard for logic or audience engagement ... a reboot must offer something compelling. The Strangers: Chapter 1 is a film that should not exist, as the original already achieved what was necessary to be entertaining and memorable."

TheWrap: "While we wait for the Strangers to show up, nothing happens. Oh sure, there are incidents. The car breaks down and they have to find an Airbnb in a small town. He loses his inhaler. She has trouble finding vegan food, because there are no vegans in [checks notes] Oregon. But that's not drama and it's not even conflict. It's tedious filler. Maya and Ryan are some of the lousiest horror protagonists in recent memory ... Nothing matters until the killers attack, and they don't attack for a very long time. And when they do, their victims aren't allowed to act like human beings. And somehow it gets worse because the killers are just going through the motions. It's a pat retread of all the violence from the original film, with no emotional investment and no creativity in the mayhem department." 

Variety: "Given that, at its core, this new installment has almost the exact same plot as its predecessors, one could make a convincing argument that such a tale doesn't need to be stretched across three movies à la The Hobbit. Time will tell, but for now there's enough reason for devotees of the series to be cautiously optimistic — and even a little curious — about the next two chapters."

Inverse: "Harlin's film thinks it's 'improving' on the original by filling in blanks that are blank for a reason, scrubbing away what The Strangers fans hold dear about Bertino's remarkably revolting mirror to humanity. Instead, The Strangers: Chapter 1 mimics Bertino's home invasion beats with far more rigidity than any ornamental homage. It's a remake, and quite a flimsy remake. Writers Alan R. Cohen and Alan Freedland seek more than inspiration from The Strangers, which is a shame because they carelessly misunderstand what makes Bertino's unquestionably superior post-9/11 horror flick a malicious powerhouse. The Strangers: Chapter 1 overexposes, underdelivers, and replaces despicable bleakness with formulaic predictability akin to The Strangers 2.0 (but worse)."

New York Times: "The hapless script — written by Alan R. Cohen and Alan Freedland and based on the original — offers nothing fresh in a tiring 91 minutes, and nothing daring to justify a new Strangers film, let alone a new series." 

Chicago Sun-Times: "The Strangers: Chapter 1 is a well-paced, 91-minute thrill ride that provides a steady helping of jump scares while ending on a note that has us eagerly anticipating the next chapters in the saga."

Related:

IndieWire: "Yes, the masks are great. And yes, home invasions will always be scary. But when it comes to messing with genre classics, your answer to 'Why remake a near-perfect film?' can't be 'It was here.' ... This good-but-not-great spinoff has the dusty aftertaste of a studio-driven double-dip. It's the same thing you've seen before only less mournful and more business motivated. Think Stranger Danger Lite: all the silent mocking and bursts of violence, now with half the emotional investment." 

The Strangers: Chapter 1 is in theaters Friday.

Trending Now: