I really like the start of this movie because it appears that the person is meant to have a mental disorder and is fighting their urges in an attempt not to hurt those they love. There's action almost straight away because of this, which is rare in Horrors (usually there's a lot of character introductions and set up first). It also gives the implication that it may be a genetic illness, which results in us questioning the innocence of the main character (the son of the person from the beginning). The good thing is that we know not everything is always as it seems, and there are other people to suspect, so you may not correctly guess who the killer is. The struggles of the main boy kept me interested, and the murders themselves are OK... The thing that lets the film down (for me) is the fact that it focuses on the idea of the killer being possessed by an evil spirit, which completely takes away the seemingly realistic appearance of them having a mental illness. It makes it impossible to relate to real life - unless, of course, the "spirit"/"demon" is supposed to be a metaphor for the illness. It was confusing. Having said this, Wes Craven may have felt that he needed something different from people getting murdered by a young teenager who's angry at the main character (otherwise there would be more calls that this is a repeat of 'Scream' and related films). The acting was good enough. It does seem a little slow in parts. Worth a one time watch to see what you think.

This film is a curious creature of sorts. It's the long overdue and much welcome return for Craven to a project thats completely individual and original not a sequel or a sendup of genre movie clichés and such. This film has the feel of him going to the realm of Shocker, People under the stairs and Serpent and the rainbow. Which is a good thing not that I haven't enjoyed Wes Craven films but the feel of originality has escaped them in a sense. The scream films are some of my favorite movies but it's a film like people under the stairs thats one of the defining moments of my childhood. The film centers on a group of seven teens that are born the same night a serial killer dies/disappears and sixteen years later they begin to get brutally murdered one by one. Now as a whole the ultimate concept of the film is quite intriguing and I can really appreciate the effort and doing something fun and new. The film however is a mixed bag. The acting is decent and the cast seems believable and the murders are somewhat gruesome if a little generic. And the film produces some creep out moments but nothing that will prevent you from sleeping after seeing it. Now for the mediocre/bad Craven's direction comes off fresh and engaging but amateur at the same time which is kind of inexcusable for a guy whose been doing this so long. The film feels loopy at times although it's always interesting and some of the dialogue feels silly and ridiculous. The characters feel under developed and poorly drawn it's hard to care about anyone really because we don't know them and the film is sprinkled with unintentionally awkward and funny moments and suspense sequences that don't go anywhere. That being said the film is an effective whodunit and try to scramble your brain to much watching it because it's all seems very complex and simplistic at the same time. I loved the symbolism, and subtleties the film offers giving it a much needed depth not present in most genre pics. It's true that "my soul to take" is a mixed bag but what it does offer is an original and fresh take on the genre. It's far from being perfect but the ultimate concept and the films rocky journey are worth the price of admission.

my soul to take a Wes Craven film, In the sleepy town of Riverton, legend tells of a serial killer who swore he would return to murder the seven children born the night he died. Now, 16 years later, people are disappearing again. Has the psychopath been reincarnated as one of the seven teens, or did he survive the night he was left for dead? Only one of the kids knows the answer. Adam "Bug" Heller (Max Thieriot) was supposed to die on the bloody night his father went insane. Unaware of his dad's terrifying crimes, he has been plagued by nightmares since he was a baby. But if Bug hopes to save his friends from the monster that's returned, he must face an evil that won't rest. definitely disappointing especially coming from the "master of suspense" (craven) the only thing i was scared of watching this film, is that scream 4 has potential to be just as bad as this crap. Note to Wes Craven try being more originally, these guys try to milk every drop from the dying cow. teen slasher movies pretty much died in 90's

I really loved this movie. Its tough to say much without spoiling it but the story is really interesting, the performances are excellent and the ending was like a less self-conscious Scream (well it is a Wes Craven movie after all)
Don't worry too much about figuring out who the killer is, theres a solid chance you will know early on, its not really THAT kind of movie - enjoy it for the story and for the acting.

ok first of all 3D ???? i don't think so, what happened to Mr Wes Craven??? this movie seriously is a psycho movie, it will make u mad, the plot and the twist and turn were not that bad but the movie was really weak. it was not scary at all but it was creepy as hell. Wes Craven's first new movie in five years is a brainless, joyless, and yes, you might even say, soulless teen slasher. Poorly written, ill-conceived & lacking in Craven's expert touch. To start out with the positives on 'My Soul to Take,' because there aren't a whole lot, the concept is pretty interesting. It has kind of a 'Fallen' (1998) feel to it with the possibility that a killer's soul may have traveled and no one knows whom to trust. There are also some creative elements to the film that had nothing to do with the plot (the Condor scene, for one) that added a nice touch to the entertainment value, though none of them are really important enough to have a lasting impact on the film's quality. Finally, the acting from the teens is, surprisingly, pretty darn good. Typically, in a film focusing on younger kids, you'll get solid (or at least superior) acting from the adults & subpar performances from the children. Here, the kids were actually the impressive ones, especially Emily Meade as Fang and Max Thieriot as Bug, while the adults were pretty much unbearable to watch. Nothing about "My Soul to Take" is either scary or suspenseful. Mind you, the performances are pretty good, but Craven doesn't distinguish himself. "My Soul to Take" is every bit as forgettable as Craven's second-rate "Cursed" and never antes up half the tension of "Red Eye." Ultimately, the slasher here referred to as the "Riverton Ripper" isn't very terrifying in comparison with either hockey mask clad Jason of the "Friday the 13th" franchise or Michael Myers of the "Halloween." The slasher attacks are timed when you least expect them, but Craven doesn't give his mass murderer anything in the way of traits or an attitude to make him intimidating. Worse, anybody who ever saw the classic Marx Brothers' comedy "Duck Soup" will spot a rip-off of the mirror scene between Groucho and Harpo. The only thing that gets taken in "My Soul to Take" is your money and your time. please , AVOID IT.

Ok. Seriously? This movie was bad very bad. the acting was terrible. The script was worse, and the storyline, well the storyline was ok. the split personality thing that could've gone somewhere just a little bit, other than that this movie was absolute garbage. I can't believe i actually spent my time and money to go to the theater to see this movie. Me along with other people in the theater were laughing at parts that weren't even supposed to be funny. For example I cannot take killers seriously when they are running at you screaming "RIPPER!!!!" and wearing what appears to be a puppet suit. Maybe this was just me but i do not reccomend seeing this movie. If you would like to see my absolute hate for this movive check my rant out at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk8n5uXHqyk