--- title: "40 Days and 40 Nights: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/40-days-and-40-nights/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/40-days-and-40-nights" critics_score: 50 critics_reviews: 13 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # 40 Days and 40 Nights (2002): what the critics said Critics' score 50 from 13 reviews: 1 positive, 7 mixed, 5 negative. Most critics treat this as a slight, one-joke sex farce and do not pretend otherwise. The warmer reviews find more in it than the premise promises: a comedy that is sweeter and less crude than most teen fare, with a sly undertow about love and self-knowledge. Praise clusters on Shannyn Sossamon, repeatedly called the film’s most winning presence, and on an amiable supporting cast. Several note that the premise is neat even where the gags are hit and miss. The spread is wide, running from mild approval to outright dismissal, and the division is largely over Josh Hartnett. The Guardian and Eye for Film judge him miscast and bland; Slant, by contrast, praises his chemistry with Sossamon, which Total Film says is missing altogether. The harshest reviews come from British outlets, which find the farce prolonged, the humour forced and the climax misjudged. Three reviews are only partly readable, so their verdicts rest on inference. ## Los Angeles Times — Kevin Thomas Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 1 March 2002. Thomas finds the comedy frothy but more substantial than it first appears, with an engaging and insightful story. He praises its sly subtext about sex, love, and self-discovery. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-mar-01-et-thomas1-story.html) ## Variety — Todd McCarthy Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). 21 February 2002. McCarthy finds the comedy funny, sexy, and silly, but ultimately a disposable farce. He praises Shannyn Sossamon as especially winning, while faulting the hit-and-miss gags and the film’s failure to deepen its themes. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2002/film/reviews/40-days-and-40-nights-1200551209/) ## Screen Daily — Emanuel Levy Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 4 March 2002. The review text is behind a paywall, so its verdict is unavailable. The visible page does not reveal what the critic singled out for praise or complaint. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/40-days-and-40-nights/408534.article) ## The New Yorker — David Denby Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 11 March 2002. The issue lists a review covering “40 Days and 40 Nights” alongside “We Were Soldiers,” but the review’s verdict is not visible. The accessible page does not reveal what Denby praises or criticizes. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/03/11) ## The New York Times Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 1 March 2002. The page is identified as a film review, but its text is unavailable, so the critic’s verdict cannot be verified. The headline suggests abstinence is a focus, but offers no reliable evidence of what the critic praised or criticized. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/01/movies/film-review-mastering-the-domain-of-abstinence.html) ## Slant Magazine — Ed Gonzalez Rating 2.5/4. 23 February 2002. Gonzalez finds the film unexpectedly sweet despite its one-joke premise and fixation on sex. He praises the chemistry between Josh Hartnett and Shannyn Sossamon, while calling Paul Costanzo the weakest link. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/40-days-and-40-nights/) ## Radio Times — Lorien Haynes Rating 3/5. Haynes finds the comedy cute and less crude than many teen-oriented films. She singles out its comparatively gentle treatment of celibacy for praise. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-11i580/40-days-and-40-nights/) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Rating 2/4. 1 March 2002. Ebert gives the film a negative verdict. He faults its comedy for relying on a thin premise and forced humor. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/40-days-and-40-nights-2002) ## Total Film — Total Film Rating 2/5. 31 May 2002. The review finds the comedy disappointingly average, caught between raunchy farce and thoughtful romance. It praises the neat premise and supporting cast, but says the attractive leads lack chemistry. [Read the review](https://www.gamesradar.com/40-days-and-40-nights-review/) ## Empire — Mark Dinning Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. Dinning finds the comedy a neat subversion of the teen genre but ultimately humdrum. He praises the amiable cast and sharp observations, while criticizing Hartnett’s casting and the badly misjudged climax. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/40-days-40-nights-review/) ## The AV Club — Scott Tobias Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 29 March 2002. Tobias finds the comedy predictable and shallow about relationships, despite its smoother style than a typical teen comedy. He singles out Josh Hartnett’s strained manic performance and the film’s smutty jokes as major weaknesses. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/40-days-and-40-nights-1798195460) ## The Guardian — Xan Brooks Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 31 May 2002. Brooks finds the film an agonisingly prolonged sex farce and judges Hartnett hopelessly miscast. He especially criticizes Lehmann’s crass zooms and the characters’ relentless overacting. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian_review/0,,724807,00.html) ## Eye for Film — Angus Wolfe Murray Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 29 May 2002. The critic dismisses the film as unfunny and dull. He particularly criticizes Josh Hartnett’s bland central performance, saying the film only comes alive when the character is offscreen. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/40-days-40-nights-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/40-days-and-40-nights.md