--- title: "Hitchcock: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/hitchcock/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/hitchcock" critics_score: 54 critics_reviews: 22 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." --- # Hitchcock (2012): what the critics said Critics' score 54 from 22 reviews: 6 positive, 9 mixed, 7 negative. The consensus on Hitchcock is mixed, with praise clustering around the cast rather than the film’s account of creativity or marriage. Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren earn repeated approval for their playful exchanges, dry humour and suggestions of affection beneath the friction. Even several unfavourable reviews find something to enjoy in the performances, while Scarlett Johansson’s Janet Leigh receives occasional praise. The more receptive critics find a lively, accessible entertainment, despite uneven storytelling. The divide is wide over how much those performances can compensate for a shallow portrait. Reservations centre on tidy psychological explanations and a marital drama that several critics find less compelling than the making of Psycho. The Hollywood Reporter welcomes the marriage’s tensions and warmth; the Los Angeles Times finds it uninteresting. There is disagreement over the Ed Gein scenes, too: Little White Lies praises their intensity, while Digital Spy faults the framing device. ## The New Yorker — Richard Brody Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 23 November 2012. The critic finds the docudrama lively and engaging despite its workmanlike direction and formulaic storytelling. He singles out Hopkins’s performance and an ecstatic late scene in which Hitchcock conducts a famous set piece. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/goings-on-about-town/movies/hitchcock-2) ## IndieWire — Eric Kohn Rating B. 3 November 2012. Festival review. The review finds the film engaging but ultimately weakened by its detour into marital drama. It praises Anthony Hopkins’s vivid, likable performance as Hitchcock. [Read the review](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/culture/afi-fest-review-hitchcock-sports-a-fine-anthony-hopkins-performance-but-does-it-downplay-hitchs-genius-43683/) ## The Guardian — John Patterson Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 2 November 2012. Festival review. The critic finds the film clever and witty, though its middle section sags. Hopkins and Mirren’s performances are singled out as what makes it live and breathe. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/nov/02/hitchcock-first-look-review) ## The Hollywood Reporter — Todd McCarthy Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 2 November 2012. Festival review. McCarthy finds the film absorbing, entertaining, and lively despite some dramatic ups and downs. He especially praises the dryly witty exchanges between Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren, which bring the Hitchcock marriage’s tensions and affection to life. [Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/hitchcock-film-review-385938/) ## Film Comment — Violet Lucca Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). The page frames the piece as a review comparing Hitchcock and The Girl. Its accessible text does not reveal the critic’s verdict or a specific point of praise or complaint. [Read the review](https://www.filmcomment.com/review-hitchcock-anthony-hopkins-the-girl-toby-jones/) ## Screen Daily — Tim Grierson Fi1m's normalised score 64/100 (inferred from the text). 2 November 2012. The accessible page does not reveal the critic’s verdict. No specific praise or complaint is visible beyond the film’s identification and metadata. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/hitchcock/5048538.article) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Rating 2.5/4. 21 November 2012. Ebert found the film entertaining but limited as a portrait of Hitchcock. He singled out the performances of Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren as a strength. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/hitchcock-2012) ## Time Out — Trevor Johnston Rating 3/5. 5 February 2013. The accessible page identifies this as a three-star review, but its verdict is unavailable in the page text. The description highlights Hitchcock’s gamble on making a horror film that Hollywood considered toxic. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/hitchcock-1) ## The AV Club — Scott Tobias Rating C. 22 November 2012. Tobias finds the film uneven, arguing that its focus on Hitchcock’s domestic life distracts from the more compelling story of making Psycho. He praises the scenes of Hitchcock asserting his creative vision, especially the playful depiction of him anticipating and manipulating audience reactions. [Read the review](https://avclub.com/hitchcock-1798175074) ## Little White Lies — Glenn Heath Jr Rating 2/2/2. 7 February 2013. The critic finds the biopic middling, glib, and psychologically stilted. They praise the intense scenes linking Hitchcock with Ed Gein, but fault the film’s lack of cohesive visual style and ambition. [Read the review](https://lwlies.com/reviews/hitchcock) ## Radio Times — Andrew Collins Rating 2/5. The review finds the film agreeably comic but ultimately shallow. It praises Anthony Hopkins’s playful portrayal of Hitchcock as a stubborn, wisecracking teddy bear. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-fczyy5/hitchcock/) ## Empire — Ian Nathan Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 22 May 2012. Nathan finds the film brisk and entertaining in places but ultimately shallow and unconvincing. He praises Scarlett Johansson’s performance as Janet Leigh, while faulting the film’s surface-level portrayal of Hitchcock and his creative life. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/hitchcock-review/) ## Variety — Justin Chang Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 2 November 2012. Festival review. Chang finds the film diverting but dramatically shallow, with little insight into Hitchcock or the making of Psycho. He praises Helen Mirren’s nuanced performance as Alma, while faulting the film’s superficial treatment of its subject. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2012/film/reviews/hitchcock-1117948672/) ## Los Angeles Times — Kenneth Turan Fi1m's normalised score 25/100 (inferred from the text). 21 November 2012. Turan finds the film listless and its central marriage uninteresting, with little reason to care about the characters’ predicaments. He praises Scarlett Johansson’s performance as Janet Leigh and the period Hollywood cameos as bright spots. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-xpm-2012-nov-21-la-et-mn-hitchcock-review-alfred-hitchcock-20121123-story.html) ## Evening Standard Fi1m's normalised score 15/100 (inferred from the text). 27 February 2013. The critic finds the film banal, predictable and phoney, unable to compete with Hitchcock’s own work. Helen Mirren’s formidable performance stands out, while the critic particularly objects to the corny romantic reconciliation. [Read the review](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/hitchcock-review-8486431.html) ## Slant Magazine — Andrew Schenker Rating 0.5/4. 16 November 2012. The critic finds the film a colossal failure, arguing that it reduces Hitchcock’s life and the making of Psycho to superficial, tidy explanations. He singles out the shower-scene sequence as especially risible for conflating Hitchcock’s personal insecurities with his filmmaking. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/hitchcock/) ## Paste — Tyler Chase Rating 8.2/10. 4 December 2012. The review finds the film tremendously enjoyable despite uneven elements. It praises Anthony Hopkins’s layered performance and Helen Mirren’s portrayal of Alma as the film’s heart. [Read the review](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/hitchcock) ## Den of Geek — David Crow Rating B. 30 November 2012. Crow finds the film enjoyable but lacking suspense, with its drama often feeling contrived. He singles out Hopkins and Mirren’s lively performances and their sparring as its strongest feature. [Read the review](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/hitchcock-review/) ## The Wrap Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). 21 November 2012. The critic finds the film enjoyable despite judging it not especially good. Hopkins and Mirren’s energetic, playful performances are singled out for giving it a lively jolt. [Read the review](https://www.thewrap.com/hitchcock-review-almost-over-top-anthony-hopkins-helen-mirren-make-it-fun-66156/) ## Digital Spy — Ben Rawson-Jones Rating 3/5. 5 February 2013. The critic finds the film watchable but uneven, with its characters and relationships insufficiently explored. The Psycho recreation and Hopkins and Mirren’s performances stand out, while the Ed Gein framing device is faulted. [Read the review](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a447944/hitchcock-review-marginally-more-flesh-than-norman-batess-mother/) ## The Playlist Fi1m's normalised score 55/100 (inferred from the text). 21 November 2012. The review calls the film breezy but disposable, with the performances keeping it afloat. It singles out Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren for their dedicated work. [Read the review](https://theplaylist.net/review-hitchcock-a-breezy-disposable-effort-saved-by-anthony-hopkins-helen-mirrens-dedicated-performances-20121121/) ## Collider — Matt Goldberg Rating C-. 23 November 2012. Goldberg finds the film an unconvincing, predictable marriage drama that fails to make the making of Psycho compelling. He praises Helen Mirren’s performance and the moments when the leads’ offbeat qualities emerge. [Read the review](https://collider.com/hitchcock-review/) --- © 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/hitchcock.md