The reviews split almost evenly into positive, mixed and negative, and the disagreement is real rather than lukewarm. Where critics agree is on the cast. Anne Hathaway’s Grand High Witch is described repeatedly as flamboyant, camp and fully committed, and for most reviewers she is the reason to watch. Octavia Spencer’s grandmother earns quieter, warmer praise, and several critics approve of the move to 1960s Alabama and the restoration of Dahl’s original ending.
The reservations cluster around what Zemeckis has taken out. Many find the digital effects too smooth to be properly revolting, and miss the prosthetic grotesquerie of Nicolas Roeg’s 1990 film; the words that recur are sanitised, defanged and flat. The spread is wide, from four-star notices at Radio Times and HeyUGuys to failing grades at Collider and The Playlist. Even Hathaway divides: Den of Geek finds her wearying, and RogerEbert.com and Empire disagree outright on whether the film is frightening enough.
R
Radio Times
★★★★ · Trevor Johnston
80
This is a grandly entertaining CGI-assisted take on the classic tale with strong turns from Octavia Spencer and Stanley Tucci, though it may be too intense for younger viewers and the ending stumbles slightly.
Read the full review →V
Variety
21 October 2020 · Owen Gleiberman
75*
Anne Hathaway gives a flamboyantly fun high-camp evil performance as the Grand High Witch that provides the film with its sick-joke center of gravity. Zemeckis stages the elemental storyline with prankish flair in this baroque cartoon horror remake set in the American South.
Read the full review →H
The Hollywood Reporter
21 October 2020 · David Rooney
70*
The remake is mostly captivating, with flamboyant wickedness from Anne Hathaway and warm, humorous work from Octavia Spencer as the grandmother. It delivers sufficient charm, invention, and family-friendly mischief despite some inconsistent energy.
Read the full review →Anne Hathaway delivers a full-tilt, wild-eyed performance as the Grand High Witch that is mesmerising and a reason to see the film. The review highlights vibrant additions from the writers and the restoration of Dahl’s ending.
Read the full review →T
Total Film
21 October 2020
70*
The critic notes Anne Hathaway aims for hammy, funny villainy as the Grand High Witch and has a whale of a time in the role.
Read the full review →E
Empire
21 October 2020 · Nick de Semlyen
60*
The critic finds it a mild disappointment that lacks in the frights department despite being kicky and colourful with a strong Anne Hathaway performance as the Grand High Witch. It hits the story beats but feels undercooked overall, though still a fun Halloween treat.
Read the full review →L
Little White Lies
27 October 2020 · 2/3/2 · Leila Latif
60
The critic finds Zemeckis's saccharine, polished retelling of Dahl's story lacks the original's darkness and wit, though the cast (especially Octavia Spencer) appears to be having fun.
Read the full review →R
RogerEbert.com
23 October 2020 · Brian Tallerico
60*
The film delivers some of the most unapologetically scary imagery in recent family entertainment and features a standout, scenery-chewing performance from Anne Hathaway as the Grand High Witch. However, the writing is clunky, the plotting thin, and the ending weak.
Read the full review →I
IndieWire
21 October 2020 · C · David Ehrlich
57
Zemeckis delivers a dreadful, soulless adaptation that lacks magic or purpose, feeling like a sentimental misfire rather than a faithful or inspired take on Dahl. The film sanitizes the source material's edge into bland, aimless family content.
Read the full review →A
The AV Club
21 October 2020 · C · A.A. Dowd
57
Zemeckis strips the wicked black magic and queasy edge from Dahl's story, replacing it with a softening, coddling filter and sentimental nostalgia. The result is defanged and curiously flat despite some creepy digital effects.
Read the full review →S
Slant Magazine
23 October 2020 · ★★/4 · Chris Barsanti
50
This competent but unnecessary remake casts a weak spell, with slick CGI that lacks the grotesque impact of the prior version and fails to fully embrace ugliness or danger. It benefits from a mostly Black cast but remains a bland streaming filler.
Read the full review →S
Screen Daily
21 October 2020
40*
The film is full of spectacle but short on magic, leaning on CGI and action at the expense of wit, sophistication and character; it is surprisingly impersonal compared to the 1990 Roeg version.
Read the full review →The film is an aimless adaptation without direction or purpose, unable to capture Dahl's macabre-cozy mix, though Hathaway delivers an extra, committed performance full of big choices. It feels flat overall, even with grotesque elements.
Read the full review →G
The Guardian
21 October 2020
30*
The critic finds Robert Zemeckis’s retelling grumpy rather than scary, with comedy that feels frantic and strained. Octavia Spencer’s grandmother provides some easy charm that rescues the film a bit.
Read the full review →i
The i Paper
21 October 2020 · Francesca Steele
30*
The critic calls the film slick and dull, a bloodless adaptation that strips away the story's revolting panto-horror through overly believable CGI and a self-confident comical tone. Anne Hathaway's grotesque Grand High Witch performance stands out as the one effective element.
Read the full review →H
HeyUGuys
23 October 2020 · ★★★★ · Richard Phippen
80
The critic praises Zemeckis and Hathaway for having great fun with the magical, maniacal tale and calls it a perfect Halloween treat with the right mix of trick. They single out the faithful adaptation of the novel, the relocation to the American South, and the cast's gusto and heart.
Read the full review →C
Consequence
21 October 2020 · B
77
Zemeckis offers a zippy, fun cautionary tale with a timely 1960s Alabama setting that intensifies the fear in meaningful ways, though pacing jitters and the ending falter.
Read the full review →D
Deadline
21 October 2020 · Pete Hammond
70*
The critic praises Hathaway for swinging for the fences in a frenetic, tech-assisted performance as the Grand High Witch that captures the book's menace, especially in the second half with its mouse transformations. Spencer's grounded turn and the strong production values are highlighted, though the high-decibel approach and potential scariness for young viewers are noted.
Read the full review →D
Den of Geek
22 October 2020 · ★★★ · David Crow
60
The remake offers more menace and edge than typical family films while staying closer to Dahl’s text with a tighter narrative and clearer emotional stakes for the boy. It falls short of the original’s prosthetic effects and practical magic, relying instead on broad CGI and a wearying performance from Hathaway.
Read the full review →The critic finds the remake creepy but ultimately superfluous, neither a disaster nor an improvement on the 1990 Nicolas Roeg version. Hathaway's campy, effects-assisted turn as the Grand High Witch and the resort-set action sequences are singled out for praise amid complaints about extraneous narration and overly faithful elements.
Read the full review →C
Collider
21 October 2020 · D · Matt Goldberg
37
The film is boring and flat, missing every opportunity to be interesting and instead opting for cartoony CGI mice and broad performances that talk down to the audience.
Read the full review →P
The Playlist
21 October 2020 · D · Andrew Crump
37
The critic calls the film straight-up childish and pandering to children rather than serving them well, criticizing its juvenile humor and lack of imagination. They single out Hathaway's over-the-top performance and the dodgy digital effects as major flaws compared to the 1990 adaptation.
Read the full review →P
Polygon
22 October 2020 · Karen Han
35*
Anne Hathaway’s campy performance can’t save the remake, which is almost boring and fails to cohere into a truly memorable movie despite some scary scenes.
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