Richard Harrington of the Washington Times gave the film a negative review, noting the poor decision-making from its characters and the lack of pacing, writing "Carpenter, whose batting average is dipping dangerously low, shows no grasp of character development, plot line or time passage. "Lloyd Paseman of "The Register-Guard" said that while the remake did not attempt to make "Village of the Damned" "something" that its predecessor was not, the film had "mediocre" dialogue and plot development. He gave it two stars out of four. Paseman also remarked that in this film Reeve made an "earnest" attempt, that Kozlowski did the highest quality acting for the film, that Dekker was "credible", and that Hamill was "badly miscast". Gene Siskel critiqued the film harshly in his 0.5/4-star review, calling the film "an excruciating bore...not a single of one its lame cliches works" and later listed it on his bottom 10 of the year, while his frequent collaborator Roger Ebert gave the film 2/4 stars and said "Carpenter directs the film quite masterfully...but one must ask why he picks the dullest, most idiotic screenplays. It's said he turned down Basic Instinct to direct this film...at that point, one must wonder if he's out to sabotage his own career." The San Francisco Times gave the film a 1/4 star review, calling it "A trip to a village of the darned tedious" and said the film featured "some of the dumbest character writing to ever grace the silver screen."