On the
review aggregator website
Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of based on reviews, with an average rating of . The website's critics consensus states, "
Fear Street Part Three: 1666 sends the slasher series back in time for a trilogy-concluding installment that caps things off on a screaming high note." On
Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 68 out of 100 based on 15 critic reviews, indicating "generally favorable" reviews. Natalia Winkelman, in her review of the
Fear Street trilogy for
The New York Times, wrote, "Here, there is less to propel the action, and lacking in pop artifacts, lingo or fashion trends, Janiak struggles to recreate the fizzy and fun tone she achieved in the earlier movies," but added: "by
Part Three, you feel safe following these survivors wherever they go." Clarisse Loughrey of
The Independent gave the film a score of 3 out of five stars, writing that "even though
Part Three is the weakest of the trilogy, director Leigh Janiak still manages to end on a high," and described it as "a thrilling finale that Janiak doses once more in old-school gore and deliciously garish neon." Donald Clarke, in his review of the
Fear Street trilogy for
The Irish Times, wrote that the film "owes more to
The Crucible than it does to any American shocker", and stated: "Though the decision to have the puritan settlers speak in largely terrible Irish accents defies all reason, the closing section ties up some ends in a satisfactory whirl of implausibly well-scrubbed colonial paranoia." Nick Allen of
RogerEbert.com gave the film a score of 3 stars out of 4, describing it as a "triumphant finale" and writing, "Executed with the confidence of a victory lap, the last hour of
1666 is a series highlight, especially as it captures the brand of out-and-out fun that has made Janiak a newly minted crowd-pleaser in horror." Benjamin Lee of
The Guardian gave the film a score of 4 stars out of 5, describing it as "
The Crucible meets
The Witch meets
It meets
It Follows meets the trilogy's ultimate overarching influence
Scooby-Doo," and called it "a rousing finale to a winning new franchise." He concluded, "Janiak has found a way to add new life to old material, gifting us with the rare horror franchise that makes us want more rather than less, the prospect of an expanded universe seeming less like a curse and more of a blessing." Lovia Gyarkye of
The Hollywood Reporter described the film as "bloated" and stated that it "perfunctorily ties up the narrative loose ends with little finesse or energy — a shame because the earlier two entries, chock-full of pop culture references and subversive thematic underpinnings, had immense potential." She concluded, "by the end of
Fear Street Part 3, when the mystery had been solved and justice ostensibly served, I was more relieved than anything else." Barry Hertz of
The Globe and Mail wrote, "In
Part Three, [Leigh Janiak] falls prey to the same problem as
Part Two: her well-funded take on the work of folk-horror icons like
Ken Russell,
Piers Haggard and
Mario Bava (with a big tip of the hat to contemporaries like
Robert Eggers) is too safe, too slick, too far from gonzo." Inkoo Kang, in her review of the
Fear Street trilogy for
The Washington Post, wrote: "the trilogy's final scenes, which bring the action back to 1994, feel more like an iteration of
Home Alone, with mindless stabbers taking the place of
Joe Pesci and
Daniel Stern. Those two might not have had any brains, either, but at least they had some personality." The film ranks on Rotten Tomatoes' Best Horror Movies of 2021. == Notes ==