HIM (2025)

Richards finds the film a riveting, ambitious ride, though its style sometimes overwhelms its storytelling. He especially praises Marlon Wayans’s committed performance and the film’s visually striking direction.

Debruge finds the film a tense, surreal critique of football’s brutal demands, though its style can feel self-indulgent. He praises its unsettling body-horror imagery for making the sport’s physical costs impossible to ignore.

The page content is inaccessible, so the critic’s verdict cannot be determined. No specific praise or complaint is available in the supplied text.

The review gives the film a mixed-positive verdict, describing its blend of gridiron action and gore as spiky. It singles out Marlon Wayans cutting loose as a quarterback.

Keogan finds the film an unsuccessful blend of football and horror that fails to deliver meaningful cultural critique. She faults its vague supernatural plot and heavy-handed religious imagery for sidelining football’s real-world harms and draining the horror of scares.

Ehrlich pans the film as dull, compromised, and ineffective at critiquing sports culture. He singles out Marlon Wayans’s intense performance as the one element holding it together.

Clark finds the film’s football-horror premise and aesthetics compelling but says its commentary on the sport’s harms is clumsy and underdeveloped. He singles out Marlon Wayans’s forceful performance for holding the scattershot plotting together.

Nicholson finds the film visually striking but ultimately vacuous, with a plot and ideas that fail to cohere. She praises its striking production design, inventive imagery and score, as well as Marlon Wayans’ energetic performance.

The Guardian finds the film a disappointing, muddled critique of American football, ultimately calling it a fumble. It praises the supporting performances and stylish visual touches, but says the story lacks credibility and Marlon Wayans overplays his role.

Ebiri finds the film visually electrifying but ultimately hollow and thematically underdeveloped. He praises Marlon Wayans’s opaque, compelling performance, while criticizing the spectacle for failing to deepen its ideas about masculinity and football.

Scheck finds that the film starts promisingly but loses its way in a bizarre, over-the-top second half. He praises the arresting X-ray-style violence, unsettling score, and committed performances, particularly Tyriq Withers and Marlon Wayans.

The review finds HIM entertaining but ultimately uneven, with its familiar imagery and predictable direction keeping its parts from adding up. It praises Marlon Wayans’s committed performance and the film’s graphic, effectively used violence.

The review finds the film stylish and strange but ultimately let down by a predictable story and an unsatisfying finale. It singles out Marlon Wayans’s unsettling, energetic performance as the film’s standout.

The review finds the film overblown and incoherent, with style overwhelming its potentially compelling story. It praises Marlon Wayans’s ferocious performance as the film’s standout strength.

Bonaime finds that the film squanders its promising ideas and offers little depth. He praises its dark, haunting cinematography and Marlon Wayans’s intimidating performance.

The critic finds the film predictable and muddled, despite its promising questions. Marlon Wayans earns praise for his committed performance, while the opaque mythology and weak suspense draw criticism.

Hammond finds the film incoherent and ineffective as both satire and horror. He praises Marlon Wayans’s authoritative, mysterious performance, while faulting the scare tactics for having little impact.

The critic finds the film a messy, aimless failure that never develops its themes. They praise flashes of charisma from Tyriq Withers and Marlon Wayans, but fault the script and its empty stylistic flourishes.