Critics’ reviews

The Descent (2005)

11 reviews from 11 publications. Critics’ score 72: 5 positive, 1 mixed, 1 negative.

Back to our review of The Descent

72
Positive
5
Mixed
1
Negative
1

Most critics find The Descent a forceful, carefully constructed horror film, with praise concentrated on Neil Marshall’s control of tension and the claustrophobic cave setting. The reviews repeatedly single out lighting, sound and the use of cramped space for creating dread before the violence escalates. Several also value the all-female cast’s chemistry and strained relationships, finding enough character interest to make the gore matter rather than treating it as the sole attraction.

The spread is wide, with characterisation the clearest point of disagreement. The New York Times admires the craft but finds the women sometimes blur together, while The Guardian accepts silliness and plot holes as the price of the film’s energy and scares. Slant Magazine dissents more sharply, arguing that the slick technique conceals poorly distinguished characters and unconvincing emotional appeals; for most critics, those weaknesses do not cancel out the suspense.

Time Out
4 July 2005 · NF
85*

The critic calls it a smarter, nastier and more grown-up follow-up to Dog Soldiers, with visceral horror, complex group dynamics among the all-female cast and psychological depth alongside the scares. Some character relationships could have been sharper, but the film remains fiercely entertaining with blood, guts and brains.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
2 August 2006 · B+ · Scott Tobias
83

The critic praises the film's masterful use of light, space, and tension in the cave setting, which creates dread even before the monsters appear. It sustains intense horror through clever manipulation of the environment and escalating peril.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
5 July 2005
80*

The review describes it as superior British genre fare that is unashamedly gory yet handsomely crafted and inventive, with gallows humour and strong characterisation that avoids relying only on shock tactics. It stands out among low-budget British horror for its energy, inventiveness and appeal beyond core horror fans.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
8 July 2005 · ★★★ · Peter Bradshaw
60

A scary and lairy little British horror film about six women climbers who find something very nasty in a cave. It has silly moments and plot-holes but carries off with punky flair and keeps the yeecch factor high, focusing on the claustrophobic tension and Juno's ambiguous motives.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
5 May 2006
30*

The critic calls the film slick but reductive, faulting its failure to create distinguishable or compelling female characters amid the darkness and chaos of the cave setting. The story is seen as a hopeless exercise interrupted by unnecessary emotional bids.

Read the full review →
Empire
· Dan Jolin

The critic praises Neil Marshall's mastery of horror, noting the film's relentless tension, claustrophobic setting, and effective scares that build on his earlier work like Dog Soldiers. The economical concept of six women in a cave and the inventive use of lighting and sound design are singled out for making it terrifying and accomplished.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
6 August 2006 · Mark Olsen

The review calls the film a volatile mix of nail-biting suspense and blood-soaked thrills that leaves a lasting impression on viewers. It highlights Marshall as a bold new voice in horror who effectively pushes characters and audiences to their limits.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
4 August 2006 · Manohla Dargis

The critic finds the film a full-throttle horror freakout with bountiful scares and strong visceral impact from its female cast and use of darkness. She praises Marshall's craft in building claustrophobia and tension but notes the characters tend to blur.

Read the full review →
Variety
11 July 2005 · Derek Elley

The critic says the chills and spills come to agreeable effect in this sophomore effort, an object lesson in making a tightly budgeted horror film work through technique and performances. It notes the lean storytelling, effective gore, and strong cast chemistry without excess emotional navel-gazing.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
8 July 2005 · Scott Macdonald
90*

The critic praises Neil Marshall's film as an effective and brilliantly crafted horror that improves on his previous work, highlighting the original creature reveal and intense atmosphere as standout elements. They strongly recommend it to horror fans as a modern classic.

Read the full review →
Digital Spy
12 July 2005 · Daniel Saney
85*

The critic praises Neil Marshall's film as an excellently constructed horror movie that builds tension effectively before unleashing brutality, highlighting the realistic lighting and sound design that immerses the audience in the claustrophobic cave setting along with strong performances. The review notes the serious tone compared to the director's previous work and recommends it to horror fans.

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