---
title: "Madame Web: the reviews"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/madame-web/reviews"
title_page: "https://film.one/film/madame-web"
critics_score: 36
critics_reviews: 23
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."
---

# Madame Web (2024): what the critics said

Critics' score 36 from 23 reviews: 1 positive, 6 mixed, 16 negative.

Most critics find Madame Web a weak superhero origin story, with occasional pleasures that do little to offset its problems. Praise centres on Dakota Johnson’s dry humour and awkward charm: even several negative reviews credit her with making poor dialogue briefly amusing. The more sympathetic reviews also enjoy the fractious rapport between the women, finding a lightly engaging story about their relationships beneath the exposition and preparations for a larger saga.

The main complaints concern confused plotting, flat characters and action that rarely generates much excitement, though Johnson’s detachment also strikes some critics as disengagement. The spread runs from qualified affection to outright dismissal, with little agreement on whether the absurdity is enjoyable. Sight and Sound finds the ensemble lightly likeable, while the Los Angeles Times enjoys the unintentional camp; The Ringer explicitly rejects the idea that the film offers that sort of bad-film pleasure.

## Sight and Sound — Kim Newman

Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 15 February 2024. 

The critic views the film as an unnecessary but lightly likeable Spider-Man spin-off that offers fun with its team of fractious female characters. It stands out for its irreverent take and the appealing rapport among the leads despite its overstuffed nature.

[Read the review](https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/reviews/madame-web-unnecessary-lightly-likeable-addition-spider-verse)

## Los Angeles Times — Katie Walsh

Fi1m's normalised score 60/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic calls the film unintentionally campy and ridiculous rather than good, but often hilariously delightful for fans of camp. Dakota Johnson's weird, twinkling performance is singled out as the main appeal that makes it worth seeing.

[Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/movies/story/2024-02-13/madame-web-review-dakota-johnson-sydney-sweeney-sony-marvel)

## RogerEbert.com — Christy Lemire

Fi1m's normalised score 60/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic finds it a low-stakes origin story buoyed by Dakota Johnson's amusing, deadpan performance as the reluctant clairvoyant paramedic. Visual chaos in the finale and leaden exposition weigh it down, but breezy pacing makes it more enjoyable than many overwrought superhero films.

[Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/madame-web-movie-review-2024)

## IndieWire — David Ehrlich

Rating C-. 13 February 2024. 

A hilariously retrograde superhero movie that feels like it was made in 2003 and seems created by people who have never seen a superhero film. Johnson does her best to save the project, but the film lacks any real vision or coherence.

[Read the review](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/movies/madame-web-review-dakota-johnson-1234953452/)

## Screen Daily

Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic sees the film as a somewhat spirited superhero origin story that benefits from Dakota Johnson’s grounded humour and solid action but mostly serves as the unpromising first chapter of a larger saga. It is praised for its accessible plotting and the bratty rapport between the lead and the younger characters.

[Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/reviews/madame-web-review/5190461.article)

## The New York Times — Manohla Dargis

Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 14 February 2024. 

The critic finds the film bad but not memorably so, with an absurd story, risible dialogue and uninspired fights. Dakota Johnson's detached, natural awkwardness and charm are praised for humanizing the character and rising above the material.

[Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/14/movies/madame-web-review-dakota-johnson.html)

## Empire — Catherine Bray

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 14 February 2024. 

The film manages to be both over-written and underwritten at once, with talented actors left with flat characters and will-this-do dialogue. Some hints of classical storytelling survive in its contained time-loop story and personal villain motivation, but it is not much better or worse than other entries in the Sony Pictures Universe of Marvel Characters.

[Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/madame-web/)

## The Guardian

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic calls the film a tangled, incoherent mess resulting from last-minute changes and a confused attempt to distance itself from Spider-Man. They single out the junky direction, shoddy writing, disengaged lead performance and egregious product placement for particular criticism.

[Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2024/feb/13/madame-web-marvel-movie-review)

## The Hollywood Reporter — Lovia Gyarkye

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The film is a depressingly inert and airless Spider-Man spinoff with a mechanical screenplay and little imagination. Johnson delivers some lines with effective deadpan humor, but the movie fails to develop its characters or action beyond stock elements, with the post-9/11 privacy theme as one rare point of interest.

[Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-reviews/madame-web-review-dakota-johnson-1235823007/)

## Time Out — Elizabeth Weitzman

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic finds the film a misguided and committee-like origin story that traps its star in sub-par material with clumsy execution. It is singled out for its lack of a confident core and disconnected editing amid familiar Spider-Man universe tropes.

[Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/madame-web-review-2024)

## Variety — Peter Debruge

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic views the film as a superfluous, hollow knockoff with confusing script, stale action and cheap effects that feels like an off-brand imitation of better superhero fare. Dakota Johnson's eccentric performance provides the only spark of irreverence.

[Read the review](https://variety.com/2024/film/reviews/madame-web-review-dakota-johnson-1235909003/)

## Vulture — Bilge Ebiri

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 16 February 2024. 

Madame Web is bad in a boring, draggy way with no evident vision or reason for existing beyond milking IP. Johnson gamely works with poor material in places but ultimately conveys resignation; the film is inept and incoherent despite some unintentionally amusing elements.

[Read the review](https://www.vulture.com/article/review-madame-web-is-bad-in-a-boring-way.html)

## Little White Lies — Hannah Strong

Rating 1/1/1. 15 February 2024. 

The critic deems it a shoddy Spider-Man spin-off where no one seems to want to be there, with Dakota Johnson delivering a remarkably disinterested performance. They single out the cheap script, cinematography, and lazy worldbuilding for complaint.

[Read the review](https://lwlies.com/reviews/madame-web)

## The Telegraph

Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 14 February 2024. 

The review deems the film hopelessly dull and stupid, a new low for the Spider-Man spin-off franchise. It singles out the borderline sleepwalking lead performance and overall failure to deliver any engagement or wit.

[Read the review](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/madame-web-review-dakota-johnson-spider-man/)

## Total Film — Joel Harley

Rating 1/5. 14 February 2024. 

The story is bogged down by exposition and egregious product placement despite refreshingly clean and grounded visuals. Its genre aspirations as a slasher with Final Destination-style elements are admirable but undermined by the sense it is more interested in selling a fizzy-drinks brand.

[Read the review](https://www.gamesradar.com/madame-web-review/)

## The Times — Kevin Maher

Rating ★☆☆☆☆. 15 February 2024. 

The critic describes the film as a one-star mess of mind-boggling awfulness that burns the superhero genre to the ground. They single out the barely-there lead role and miscast villain for complaint.

[Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/culture/film/article/madame-web-film-review-the-latest-marvel-instalment-is-a-one-star-mess-hbzfsh58s)

## /Film — Witney Seibold

Rating 6/10. 13 February 2024. 

The critic finds the film a clunky, earnest, and weirdly charming oddity that is more of a clairvoyance caper about young women forming bonds than a traditional superhero movie. They single out its focus on sororal relationships and hang-out vibe among the leads as a point of interest amid the messiness.

[Read the review](https://www.slashfilm.com/1516331/madame-web-review/)

## Paste — Jesse Hassenger

Rating 5.9/10. 13 February 2024. 

The critic sees the movie as a scattered but never dull 2003-era superhero throwback with strong period soundtrack and design details. Dakota Johnson’s dry, ambivalent performance is praised as the main asset amid otherwise clumsy execution.

[Read the review](https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/dakota-johnson/madame-web-movie-review)

## Collider — Lisa Laman

Rating 3/10. 13 February 2024. 

The critic finds the film a tedious slog with drab visuals, awkward writing and directing, and a lack of consistent tension or authentic human emotion. One wryly humorous baby-shower scene with Dakota Johnson is singled out as the lone bright spot.

[Read the review](https://collider.com/madame-web-review/)

## Deadline — Valerie Complex

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic finds the adaptation a missed opportunity that squanders the character's potential through clinical, formulaic storytelling driven by studio mandates. The sole redeeming feature singled out is the glitch-like editing depicting the protagonist's psychic visions.

[Read the review](https://deadline.com/2024/02/madame-web-review-tangled-web-of-missed-opportunities-studio-misfires-1235823845/)

## The Wrap

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic deems the film a bland superhero entry lacking heart, emotional core or engaging elements, with stilted dialogue and threadbare plotting. Dakota Johnson's lead performance is singled out as aggressively fine but unremarkable, offering little to connect with.

[Read the review](https://www.thewrap.com/madame-web-review-dakota-johnson-sydney-sweeney/)

## Polygon — Austen Goslin

Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 13 February 2024. 

The critic views the film as the most shameless and cynical superhero movie, essentially a two-hour post-credits teaser for future entries. Dakota Johnson’s sarcastic comedy and reactions are singled out as the only intermittently tolerable elements.

[Read the review](https://www.polygon.com/reviews/24071362/madame-web-review-post-credits-scene-sequel-teaser-bad/)

## The Ringer

Fi1m's normalised score 20/100 (inferred from the text). 16 February 2024. 

The movie is a messy debacle with bad CGI, disconnected actors, and uncomfortable laughter, lacking fun or engagement despite its absurd premise; it fails to qualify as enjoyable 'good bad' cinema.

[Read the review](https://www.theringer.com/2024/02/16/movies/madame-web-sony-spiderverse-bad-movie-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/madame-web.md