--- title: "Catwoman: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/catwoman/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/catwoman" critics_score: 34 critics_reviews: 14 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." --- # Catwoman (2004): what the critics said Critics' score 34 from 14 reviews: 2 positive, 1 mixed, 11 negative. Most critics find Catwoman a poor superhero film, with eleven of the fourteen reviews negative. The complaints centre on a clunky, illogical script, thin characters and digital action that offers little excitement or feline grace. Halle Berry attracts the most consistent praise, with several critics finding charm and screen presence in a role that gives her little substance. Even some hostile reviews allow for moments of silliness or visual interest, though few find enough to sustain the film. The sharpest division concerns Pitof’s flashy direction and the film’s camp humour. The Los Angeles Times finds the style sophisticated and the pace brisk, while The Hollywood Reporter enjoys the kitsch despite reservations about the script and effects. These are distinct minority positions in a wide spread of verdicts. Most critics find the visuals exhausting or artificial, while Berry’s performance also divides opinion: The AV Club finds her unconvincing. ## Los Angeles Times — Kevin Thomas Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 23 July 2004. The critic finds the film swift, light on its feet, and stylish, with technical razzle-dazzle that never overshadows Halle Berry's fun, dual-personality performance as the mousy office worker turned glamorous superhuman. He singles out Pitof's sophisticated take on comic-book camp and romanticism for praise. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-jul-23-et-catwoman23-story.html) ## The Hollywood Reporter — Kirk Honeycutt Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 23 July 2004. The critic finds the film campy fun rather than a total disaster, praising Berry's appealing performance in a kitschy role while criticizing the illogical script and overreliance on digital effects. [Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/catwoman-review-movie-2004-1226110/) ## The New York Times — A. O. Scott Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 22 July 2004. The critic describes the film as a howlingly silly but moderately diverting exercise in high, pointless style that achieves the unlikely feat of making one prefer Bill Murray over Halle Berry in a cat role. He singles out its sleek, hissing, whip-cracking aesthetic and Berry's performance for note while dismissing the plot. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/22/movies/film-review-not-so-cuddly-cat-this-one-cracks-a-mean-whip.html) ## Evening Standard — Derek Malcolm Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 10 April 2012. The film is not very good, with a clunky screenplay and special effects that make Spider-Man II look classic, but Halle Berry is the one redeeming feature as a beautiful dominatrix. The director's flashy style soon palls and the vulgarity is remorseless. [Read the review](https://standard.co.uk/culture/film/halle-rescues-the-cat-7381784.html) ## Screen Daily Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 23 July 2004. The flashy but uninvolving Batman spin-off features uneven performances and a clunky script that fails to develop its themes. Pitof's stylised visuals dominate, but the film lacks the darker edge and moral ambiguity associated with the character. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/catwoman/4019479.article) ## The Guardian — Peter Bradshaw Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 6 August 2004. The film is a broad action-comedy that fails to deliver on its promise of a saucer of cream, offering only semi-skimmed UHT instead; it features some alluring silliness around the heroine's cat-like powers but lacks real claws in its cat-fight and overall execution. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian_review/0,,1276885,00.html) ## Empire — Roberto Sadovski Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). The film is a formulaic and silly wannabe blockbuster with shallow characters, dull plastic action scenes and a logic-starved plot about a cosmetics conspiracy. Berry's screen presence cannot save the unintentional laughs. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/catwoman-review/) ## Time Out — NB Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 10 September 2012. The film awkwardly mixes diluted feminism with teen blockbuster elements, resulting in a misguided address to career women. Its visual style and effects are chaotic and plastic, with Halle Berry's performance offering only fleeting promise amid broader aesthetic failures. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/catwoman) ## Variety — David Rooney Fi1m's normalised score 25/100 (inferred from the text). 22 July 2004. The critic calls the film a mangy misfire and dim popcorn inanity that lacks any real sense of fun, with a diluted script and frenetic music-video aesthetic that fails to deliver thrills or emotional payoff. He singles out the over-designed universe and poorly fleshed-out characters for complaint while noting the arresting opening titles. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2004/film/markets-festivals/catwoman-1200532062/) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 19 July 2004. The critic calls the film a dismal letdown that focuses almost entirely on Halle Berry's looks and costume while neglecting character, story, and action sequences, making it tired and dated compared to better summer fare. He singles out the lack of any meaningful exploration of what it feels like to become a catwoman for complaint. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/catwoman-2004) ## Slant Magazine — Ed Gonzalez Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 20 July 2004. The critic faults the film for exoticizing rather than deepening its heroine, an identity crisis in its visuals and soundtrack, and an overall confused, inhuman aesthetic. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/catwoman/) ## The AV Club — Nathan Rabin Rating F. 11 October 2007. The critic deems the film a complete failure that fails to learn from prior misfires like Batman & Robin, mocking its excessive camp, poor comedy, and Berry's performance as unconvincing. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/my-year-of-flops-case-file-75-catwoman-1798212745) ## The Times — Dominic Wells Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 14 August 2004. This is the stupidest and most incompetent superhero movie in years, with lifeless plots, direction towards the exit, and CGI that fails to convey feline grace; it is particularly damning next to superior films like Spider-Man 2. [Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/catwoman-12a-q0hj2gz5w93) ## Eye for Film — David Haviland Fi1m's normalised score 10/100 (inferred from the text). 13 August 2004. The critic declares it the worst Hollywood film of the year so far, with almost no creative ideas and poor execution across the board. The story is nonexistent, focusing excessively on origins and Berry's appearance rather than substance or stakes. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/catwoman-film-review-by-david-haviland) --- © 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/catwoman.md