--- title: "Tremors: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/tremors/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/tremors" critics_score: 78 critics_reviews: 10 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." --- # Tremors (1990): what the critics said Critics' score 78 from 10 reviews: 9 positive, 0 mixed, 1 negative. Most critics welcome Tremors as a funny, resourceful creature feature that understands the pleasures of 1950s monster films. Praise centres on its balance of comedy and suspense, inventive use of an underground threat, and eccentric townsfolk worth caring about. The ensemble earns consistent approval, with Bacon and Ward’s rapport singled out alongside the residents’ willingness to help one another. Practical effects and brisk pacing also draw praise, though neither wins everyone over. The spread is wide, but the disagreement is concentrated: nine reviews are positive and one is negative. Variety finds the film uncertain about when to joke and when to frighten, while Empire admires the creature designs but questions how well the puppetry has aged. The New York Times is the clear dissenter, finding the knowing humour excessive and the effects silly, and seeing little wit in a revival most critics regard as affectionate and clever. ## Radio Times — John Ferguson Rating 5/5. The critic lauds it as a sharp and funny monster movie that resurrects the spirit of B-movies, with great pacing, cameos, and an intelligent female lead. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-knd8is/tremors/) ## Los Angeles Times — Michael Wilmington Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 19 January 1990. The critic praises the film as a cheerful, unsadistic monster movie with surprises, strong small-town rhythms, and effective direction that keeps it loud, fast, and shiny. The cast and clever script stand out in this jocular good-time horror-comedy set in broad daylight. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-01-19-ca-56-story.html) ## Slant Magazine — Budd Wilkins Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 30 December 2020. The critic calls Tremors a pure sugar rush of a monster movie and a genre hybrid that toes the line between off-kilter comedy and creature-feature horror with aplomb. The unselfish banding together of the small-town residents is singled out as one of the film's foremost charms. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/tremors-4k-review-ron-underwood-arrow/) ## Little White Lies — Anton Bitel Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 4 July 2022. The critic praises the film's balance of comedy and horror, its practical effects, and strong characterization that makes the audience care about the characters. They highlight the oater-inflected monster movie's embrace of its absurdity and focus on the eccentric townsfolk. [Read the review](https://lwlies.com/home-ents/revisiting-tremors-the-cult-monster-western-with-a-sense-of-humour) ## Time Out — TCh Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 10 September 2012. The review calls it a terrific monster movie that exploits its subterranean threat ingeniously, with wonderful rapport between leads and authentic B-movie talk. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/tremors) ## Empire — Kim Newman Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2015. The critic describes the film as a clever, unfussy pastiche of 1950s monster movies, with broad humour giving way to suspense as survivors battle the creatures from rooftops using improvised methods. The monsters are cleverly designed and the humour makes the B-movie endearing, though it notes the puppetry has not aged as well. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/tremors-review/) ## Variety Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 1990. The review describes an affectionate send-up of 1950s monster pictures with better effects and clever twists, but faults it for indecision between comedy and scares. Pacing improves later, maintaining a tongue-in-cheek tone amid the escalating threat from the creatures. [Read the review](https://variety.com/1989/film/reviews/tremors-1200428172/) ## The New York Times — Vincent Canby Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 19 January 1990. The critic views the film as a jokey but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to revive 1950s B-movie monster thrills, hampered by excessive winking at the audience and silly special effects. The desert setting and cast of handymen heroes are noted but do not overcome the film's lack of wit or metaphor. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/19/movies/review-film-underground-creatures-and-dread-events.html) ## Eye for Film — Jennie Kermode Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 3 July 2012. The critic praises the film's blend of horror and comedy, strong ensemble cast, inventive action, and appealing characters, calling it a treat that bridges B-movie roots with broad appeal. She singles out the chemistry between Bacon and Ward and the pacing for particular note. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/tremors-1990-film-review-by-jennie-kermode) ## Den of Geek — Kyle Phaneuf Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 23 November 2012. The critic finds the 1990 original holds up reasonably well as a Jaws-style creature feature flipped to a desert setting with giant sandworms. It succeeds with hidden-monster suspense, strong practical effects, colourful characters and an appealing B-movie vibe, though the third act drags and some opportunities for deeper exploration are missed. [Read the review](https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/tremors-1990-lookback-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/tremors.md