--- title: "Clayface" year: 2026 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/clayface" fi1m_id: "clayface" imdb_id: "tt34890576" tmdb_id: 1400940 wikidata_id: "Q131460936" fi1m_score: 65 critics_score: 64 critics_reviews: 20 published: "2026-10-22" updated: "2026-10-22T02:59:01.440248+00:00" region: "US" 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." --- # Clayface (2026) Directed by James Watkins · 1h 49m · MPA R · Horror, Thriller, Science Fiction ## Identity Clayface - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/clayface - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** clayface - **IMDb ID:** tt34890576 - **TMDB ID:** 1400940 - **Wikidata ID:** Q131460936 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt34890576/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/1400940, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q131460936 **Fi1m score: 65** · Critics 64 from 20 reviews *In a sentence:* The flesh is horribly convincing; the conversations could use another draft > James Watkins delivers grisly transformations and a committed lead performance from Tom Rhys Harries. The thin characters and predictable writing keep *Clayface* at the level of a serviceable monster film. ## Synopsis In Gotham, Matt Hagen / Clayface (Tom Rhys Harries) undergoes transformations that make his own flesh a source of danger. Caitlyn Corr (Naomi Ackie), Frank (Eddie Marsan) and John Borrelli (Max Minghella) feature alongside him. The story follows Matt’s emergence as Clayface through bodily mutation and shapeshifting, with physical horror at the centre of its account of a man becoming a monster. Gotham is presented as an artificial, hostile city, and Matt’s changing body brings the threat closer than the streets around him. ## Review James Watkins makes *Clayface* a serviceable monster film with some unpleasantly effective transformations. We would steer body-horror enthusiasts towards it, with a warning about the thin writing. It understands the basic fear of a body becoming unfamiliar and pursues that fear with enough commitment to sustain interest. The difficulty comes when the screenplay asks its characters to matter beyond the physical ordeals they endure; too often, there is little else to know about them. Tom Rhys Harries is the principal reason Matt Hagen remains worth following. He gives the suffering enough conviction to prevent the character from becoming merely an excuse for another effect, although the script leaves him with too much of that work. Naomi Ackie, playing Caitlyn Corr, helps give the film a human presence beyond its lead. Both performances suggest a fuller drama than the writing consistently provides, which is frustrating in a story so dependent on sympathy. The practical effects are the strongest attraction, particularly when the horror stays close to the body. The thought of Matt’s flesh becoming something he cannot control makes us wince; the recognisable person undergoing the transformation gives the ugliness its force. At other points, muddy effects make the action harder to read than it needs to be. There is still enough physical conviction here to make the premise uncomfortable, without requiring every transformation to become a demonstration of how much the effects can do. Rob Hardy’s cinematography uses shadow effectively in the transformations, allowing concealment to contribute to the horror. Jon Harris’s editing helps those changes along through judicious cuts, avoiding the need to show everything continuously. James Price gives Gotham a visibly artificial, hostile appearance that suits a film in which familiar shapes become unreliable. That artificiality is a useful choice, although the city does not consistently become a compelling setting in its own right. The screenplay by Hossein Amini and Mike Flanagan is less resourceful. Too much of the dialogue has the flatness of people getting through necessary information, leaving the actors to supply the feeling themselves. The predictable plotting compounds the problem, because the conversations offer little distraction from knowing roughly where the story is heading. A straightforward monster film can survive familiar developments, but it needs people whose responses to those developments are worth following, and the supporting characters remain thin. Hauschka’s music has to support a tragedy the screenplay has only partly developed. The grotesque effects also create a tonal difficulty: some moments intended to convey suffering invite amusement instead, weakening the sympathy the performances work to establish. Humour belongs in this sort of horror, and solemnity would hardly improve every scene. The problem is that the film does not always seem in control of the response its ugliness produces. Within body horror, physical disgust can carry a modest story quite a long way. *Clayface* has enough invention in its transformations, and enough commitment from its lead, to justify interest from people who enjoy the genre. Its limited character writing prevents a firmer recommendation, however convincingly it makes flesh misbehave. Go for the practical effects and Tom Rhys Harries; keep expectations of the conversations modest. *Fi1m score 65, published 22 October 2026.* ## What the critics say The reviews lean favourable on Clayface, with praise clustering around its practical effects, grotesque transformations and commitment to body horror. Several critics find it entertaining as a self-contained horror film, without needing wider franchise connections. Tom Rhys Harries’s lead performance also draws repeated approval, including from reviewers who find the film underwhelming. The airplane and nightclub sequences attract particular attention as examples of the horror working well. There is much less agreement about the story’s emotional force. Supporters find empathy beneath the gore; others describe thin characters, shallow themes and predictable plotting. The spread is wide, from enthusiastic endorsements to outright disappointment. The Playlist argues that tonal confusion turns intended tragedy into unintended comedy, despite convincing effects. Polygon offers the sharpest rejection, finding neither a compelling character nor much fear. Even the bodily horror divides opinion: The AV Club admires the staging of transformations but finds them short on visceral impact. ## Straight answers **Is Clayface worth watching?** *Clayface* is worth considering for body-horror enthusiasts, and we score it 65 out of 100. We recommend it chiefly for the unpleasantly convincing practical transformations and Tom Rhys Harries’s committed performance; thin characters, flat dialogue and predictable plotting keep it at the level of a serviceable monster film. **How long is Clayface, and what is it rated?** *Clayface* runs 1h 49m and is rated R by the MPA in the US. It is a horror and thriller film. **Where can I watch Clayface in the US?** *Clayface* is not on any streaming or rental service in the US at the moment. It is available in 12 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily. **How violent or frightening is Clayface, and is it suitable for children?** *Clayface* has a UK 18 certificate and is unsuitable for children, with grisly bodily transformations making it a poor choice for squeamish adults too. Its horror centres on flesh becoming unfamiliar and uncontrollable; we find the practical effects uncomfortable because Harries keeps the suffering recognisably human. **How does Clayface compare to Eyes Without a Face?** *Clayface* offers grisly transformations, but we recommend [*Eyes Without a Face*](https://film.one/film/eyes-without-a-face) more firmly for horror that is both frightening and sad. The earlier film’s surgical horror makes a damaged face a source of grief, though its deliberate pace can drag; *Clayface* suits viewers chiefly interested in practical body-horror effects, with less satisfying character writing. **What should I watch after Clayface?** After *Clayface*, try [*Eyes Without a Face*](https://film.one/film/eyes-without-a-face) (1960, Fi1m 86): Surgical horror that makes a damaged face a source of grief. Then [*Seconds*](https://film.one/film/seconds) (1966, Fi1m 84): A new face offers little protection from an unhappy life; and [*The Fly*](https://film.one/film/the-fly) (1986, Fi1m 88): Bodily transformation made frightening through close attention to the person suffering. ### Reviews we read (20) - **The Hollywood Reporter**, Frank Scheck (90/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/clayface-review-dc-batman-1236736489/) - **Time Out**, Helen O’Hara (4/5): 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. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/clayface-review-2026) - **Variety**, Guy Lodge (80/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://au.variety.com/2026/film/reviews/clayface-review-41727/) - **Slant Magazine**, Jake Cole (3/4): 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. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/clayface-review-tom-rhys-harries/) - **The AV Club**, Jesse Hassenger (B-): 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. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/clayface-movie-review-2026) - **Empire**, Sophie Butcher (65/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/clayface-review/) - **IndieWire**, Kate Erbland (C+): 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. [Read](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/movies/clayface-review-body-horror-dcu-1235223002/) - **Total Film**, Bradley Russell (3/5): 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. [Read](https://www.gamesradar.com/entertainment/dc-movies/clayface-review/) - **Screen Daily**, Tim Grierson (35/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/clayface-review-the-batman-villain-gets-an-edgy-spin-off-in-james-watkins-gory-predictable-body-horror/5221662.article) - **The Guardian**, Benjamin Lee (30/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/oct/21/clayface-movie-review-body-horror) - **HeyUGuys**, Linda Marric (90/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.heyuguys.com/clayface-review/) - **Deadline**, Glenn Garner (80/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://deadline.com/2026/10/clayface-review-dcu-batman-villain-origin-story-body-horror-1237169912/) - **Den of Geek**, Rosie Knight (4/5): 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. [Read](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/clayface-review-horror-triumph-dc-studios/) - **Collider**, Gabrielle Moss (7/10): 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. [Read](https://collider.com/clayface-review-mike-flanagan-james-watkins-dcu/) - **Consequence**, Liz Shannon Miller (70/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://consequence.net/2026/10/clayface-review-dc-comics-mike-flanagan/) - **The Wrap** (68/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.thewrap.com/creative-content/movies/clayface-review-dc-tom-rhys-harries-james-watkins/) - **/Film**, Chris Evangelista (5.5/10): 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. [Read](https://www.slashfilm.com/2293090/clayface-2026-movie-review/) - **The Playlist**, Rodrigo Perez (C−): 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. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/clayface-review-james-watkins-tom-rhys-harries-20261021/) - **Digital Spy**, Ian Sandwell (40/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a74191386/clayface-review-dc/) - **Polygon**, Brian VanHooker (10/100, inferred): 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. [Read](https://www.polygon.com/clayface-dc-2026-review/) ## Details - **Director:** James Watkins - **Director:** James Watkins - **Screenplay:** Mike Flanagan, Hossein Amini - **Story:** Mike Flanagan - **Cinematography:** Rob Hardy - **Editor:** Jon Harris - **Music:** Hauschka - **Production design:** James Price - **Costume design:** Keith Madden - **Producer:** James Gunn, Peter Safran, Matt Reeves - **Cast:** Tom Rhys Harries as Matt Hagen / Clayface; Naomi Ackie as Caitlyn Corr; Eddie Marsan as Frank; Max Minghella as John Borrelli; David Dencik as Marcos Jabo; Francesca Corney as Rosie; Ruby Sear as Theresa; Wil Coban as Bones - **Runtime:** 1h 49m - **Certificate (MPA):** R - **Release (the US):** 23 October 2026 - **Genres:** Horror, Thriller, Science Fiction - **Budget:** $44 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7jlCqdtwdM ## Where to watch in the US Not streaming, renting or buying in the US at the last check. Also available in: AT, AU, BE, CH, DE, DK, ES, FR, IT, NL, NZ, PT. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## If you liked this - *Eyes Without a Face* (1960), Fi1m 86: Surgical horror that makes a damaged face a source of grief. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/eyes-without-a-face.md) - *Seconds* (1966), Fi1m 84: A new face offers little protection from an unhappy life. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/seconds.md) - *The Fly* (1986), Fi1m 88: Bodily transformation made frightening through close attention to the person suffering. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-fly.md) - *Tetsuo: The Iron Man* (1989), Fi1m 82: For bodily transformation rendered through abrasive sound and frantic cutting. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/tetsuo-the-iron-man.md) - *The Substance* (2024), Fi1m 74: Beauty and professional survival become a messy business of bodily reconstruction. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-substance.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/clayface