Critics’ reviews

Open Season (2006)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 51: 2 positive, 3 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of Open Season

51
Positive
2
Mixed
3
Negative
3

The reviews lean towards disappointment, though a minority finds an enjoyable family film beneath the familiar material. Praise centres on visual detail and characterisation: Variety admires the animation’s ability to convey personality, while Time Out finds the characters engaging after an unfunny opening. Even the less enthusiastic Slant Magazine credits the inventive animation and lively pace. Humour earns more qualified approval, with Empire finding the supporting cast responsible for the biggest laughs.

The spread is wide, and even the animation divides critics: Empire calls it awkward, while The Guardian finds it unoriginal. Reservations otherwise cluster around weak writing and relationships that fail to engage. Slant Magazine finds the voice work bland and the drama middling; Eye for Film objects to the flat plot and excessive sentiment. The disagreement is chiefly over whether the visual invention and scattered jokes offer enough compensation for the thin story.

Variety
28 September 2006 · Justin Chang
78*

Chang finds the film a witty, warmly crafted family fable that should appeal to audiences. He especially praises its first-rate animation and the subtle visual details that convey character.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 October 2006 · Derek Adams
70*

The review finds the film an enjoyable surprise despite an unfunny opening. It praises the characterisations in particular.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
29 September 2006 · John Hazelton
64*

The page identifies this as a review, but its verdict is unavailable in the paywalled text. No praise or complaint can be identified from the visible content.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
27 September 2006 · ★★/4 · Nick Schager
50

Schager finds the film forgettable, with bland voice work and middling drama, though its bouncy momentum keeps it from becoming a complete rut. He praises the inventive animation and vibrant visual style, especially the waterfall sequence.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
29 September 2006 · A.O. Scott
50*

The available page does not expose the review’s verdict. Its specific praise or complaint cannot be verified from the provided text.

Read the full review →
Empire
13 October 2006 · Helen O'Hara
30*

O’Hara finds the film sporadically funny but lacking in laughs and adventure. She singles out the supporting cast for the biggest laughs, while faulting the awkward animation and the leads’ lack of chemistry.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
· Peter Bradshaw
30*

Bradshaw finds the animation unoriginal, likening it to a dozen recent animated films. He singles out no particular element for praise.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
9 October 2006 · Angus Wolfe Murray
30*

The review finds the film dull and overburdened with treacly sentiment. It singles out the witless script and flat plot as its main failings, with only McSquizzy’s funny lines earning praise.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate