FearDotCom 2002

Critics score:
3 / 100

Reviews provided by RottenTomatoes

Glenn Lovell, San Jose Mercury News: Anyone not into high-tech splatterfests is advised to take the warning literally, and log on to something more user-friendly. Read more

John Monaghan, Detroit Free Press: Expect to be reminded of other, better films, especially Seven, which director William Malone slavishly copies. Read more

Richard Roeper, Ebert & Roeper: Fear Dot Com is more frustrating than a modem that disconnects every 10 seconds. Read more

Robert K. Elder, Chicago Tribune: As scary and minor-chord heavy as FearDotCom can be, there's no big payoff, no logical resolution. It's like waiting for a site to download, only to find that when it happens, anticipation was more than half of the empty thrill. Read more

Manohla Dargis, Los Angeles Times: While such artlessness doesn't inspire shivers, it's definitely worth a few cheap laughs. Read more

Roger Moore, Orlando Sentinel: The pity is that there's an interesting thriller buried inside this concept. Read more

Stephen Holden, New York Times: Fear dot com is so rambling and disconnected it never builds any suspense. Read more

John Anderson, Newsday: It misses the big picture, the story is impossibly lame, but you can't say it doesn't have style. Read more

Lou Lumenick, New York Post: Press the delete key. Read more

Collin Levey, Wall Street Journal: The scariest thing about Feardotcom is that the movie ever got made. Read more

Claudia Puig, USA Today: Feardotcom is the cinematic equivalent of spam in your e-mail inbox. Read more

Nathan Rabin, AV Club: FearDotCom was made with just enough craft to keep it from being the instantly dated camp howler its title promises, but it's quickly apparent that there's no thought or originality under its grim, familiar surface. Read more

J. R. Jones, Chicago Reader: [A] shameless exercise in high-tech sadism. Read more

Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly: What could have been a pointed little chiller about the frightening seductiveness of new technology loses faith in its own viability and succumbs to joyless special-effects excess. Read more

Ernest Hardy, L.A. Weekly: A corpse in its own right: It's filled with the rotting ideas of far better movies. Read more

Jami Bernard, New York Daily News: The story is a mess, some of the images offensive, the acting under par and the dialogue silly. Read more

Christy Lemire, Associated Press: It's bad in a sickening, disturbing way, with its gratuitous mixture of sex and violence. Read more

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times: The screenplay is a mess, and yet the visuals are so creative this is one of the rare bad films you might actually want to see. Read more

Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: What we get in FearDotCom is more like something from a bad Clive Barker movie. In other words, it's badder than bad. Read more

Liam Lacey, Globe and Mail: The movie's progression into rambling incoherence gives new meaning to the phrase 'fatal script error.' Read more

Andy Richards, Time Out: The clunking exposition, narrative incoherence and abysmal dialogue might find favour with aficionados of bad films, but even they won't forgive the sheer nasty mindedness of this lurid mess. Read more

Scott Foundas, Variety: With any luck, most moviegoers trying to log on to FeardotCom will find themselves confronted by a busy signal or an internal server error. Read more