Critics’ reviews

The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)

9 reviews from 9 publications. Critics’ score 81: 7 positive, 2 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of The Nightmare Before Christmas

81
Positive
7
Mixed
2
Negative
0

Most critics warmly recommend The Nightmare Before Christmas, with praise centred on its stop-motion craftsmanship, intricate sets and eccentric characters. The reviews credit Henry Selick’s direction and Tim Burton’s sensibility with creating a strange holiday world whose morbid humour and sweetness appeal to adults as well as children. Danny Elfman’s music also draws considerable approval, though the strongest agreement concerns the inventiveness of the images and the film’s departure from conventional animation.

Reservations cluster around the thin story and whether the songs match the visual invention. Empire admires the designs and music but finds that the narrative loses momentum halfway through and lacks warmth; Slant Magazine praises the craftsmanship while judging the plot underdeveloped and the songs largely forgettable. The spread runs from enthusiastic praise to qualified appreciation, with no outright rejection: even the less persuaded critics find plenty to admire in the animation.

Radio Times
★★★★★ · Alan Jones
100

The critic hails the dark holiday vision from Tim Burton's imagination, brought to life by Henry Selick's direction and Danny Elfman's songs and voice work. It praises the film's packed scares, gags, dazzling design and its clever, generation-spanning appeal as a future classic.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
22 October 1993 · ★★★★/4 · Roger Ebert
100

The film creates an entirely new, strange and haunting stop-motion world unlike any other. Ebert praises the visual richness, inventive sets and characters, clever songs by Danny Elfman, and the subversive energy that makes it a feast for the eyes and imagination.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
15 October 1993 · Kenneth Turan
90*

The film is a delightfully ghoulish holiday musical that displays more inventiveness in its 75 minutes than some studios manage in a year. Turan singles out the profligate exotic images, demented genius of the stop-motion animation, and Burton's unmistakable sensibility as its strengths.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
29 March 2002 · Keith Phipps
80*

The critic calls the film a marvelously imaginative and visually striking stop-motion work that advances the form, praising its morbid whimsy, sweetness, and Burton-esque sensibility while noting minor flaws in the songs and story length.

Read the full review →
The Independent
27 November 1994
80*

The critic praises the film's stop-motion craftsmanship, detailed design, Danny Elfman score and Burton's distinctive vision while noting some calculated charm and minor quibbles with plot and references.

Read the full review →
Time Out
13 March 2014 · TCh
80*

The review calls it a treat and an original fairy tale told in stop-motion with a lively Elfman score. It highlights Jack Skellington's boredom-driven Christmas hijacking and concludes that the beautifully realised confection will delight grown-ups of all ages.

Read the full review →
Variety
8 October 1993 · festival review · Todd McCarthy
80*

The dazzling stop-motion techniques create a striking, unique look never seen in sustained form, making it a curio appealing to kids and film enthusiasts. McCarthy highlights the fully dimensional visual style, inventive characters and sets, Elfman's score, and iconoclastic attitude as refreshing departures from conventional animation.

Read the full review →
Empire
28 July 2006 · Ian Nathan
60*

The review highlights the visual delights, morbid creations and Elfman music but criticises the story for losing momentum halfway and lacking warmth compared to other stop-motion work.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
17 October 2006 · Nick Schager
60*

The critic praises the film's eccentric visual beauty, distinctive animation, and stop-motion craftsmanship as a haunted-house fantasia but finds the plot emaciated and the songs generally banal and unmemorable.

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