What was the reception and critical response to Feldman’s documentary My Truth: The Rape of Two Coreys?
Executive summary
Corey Feldman’s 2020 documentary My Truth: The Rape of 2 Coreys prompted a polarized reception: fervent support from some viewers and scepticism or outright criticism from others, while mainstream critical coverage was minimal or muted; the film also ignited family pushback and public controversy around Feldman’s accusations and the chaotic premiere [1] [2] [3] [4]. Audience comment threads praised the film’s subject matter and Feldman’s exposure of alleged abuse, but reviewers and observers questioned the film’s evidence, production quality and Feldman’s decision to speak for the late Corey Haim [5] [1] [2] [6].
1. Box-office and critic silence — a documentary with few professional critics weighing in
Unlike widely reviewed documentaries, My Truth registered almost no formal critic reviews on major aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, which at the time showed no All Critics entries and only sparse audience feedback, signaling a lack of mainstream critical engagement rather than unanimous praise or condemnation [7] [4]. That vacuum left the film’s fate to online audiences, niche outlets and celebrity reporting rather than a broad critical consensus [7] [4].
2. Audience reaction — polarized, intensely supportive on one side and skeptical on the other
User reviews on IMDb and discussion boards reflected a sharp divide: many viewers called the film “heartbreaking” and praised Feldman for exposing alleged predation in Hollywood, describing the documentary as emotionally powerful and necessary, while other users accused Feldman of inaccuracies, monetizing the story and recycling previously public claims [1] [5]. The sentiment split broadly into defenders who framed Feldman as a brave survivor and detractors who felt the film repeated old allegations without sufficient new corroboration [1] [5].
3. Press and trade response — from MovieWeb’s promotional tone to questioning pieces
Entertainment outlets like MovieWeb covered the film’s release and Feldman’s decision to stream it and name alleged abusers, often framing it as a “long-anticipated” and sensational moment, but reviews in such outlets balanced attention-grabbing coverage with critical caveats about execution and payoff [6] [8]. Some reviewers asked whether the film delivered on its viral marketing promises or instead leaned on performative revelation, noting moments that felt orchestrated for attention more than for evidentiary clarity [6] [8].
4. Quality and craft criticisms — low budget, repetitive material and unmet expectations
Commentary on Letterboxd and other reviewer platforms flagged the film’s technical limitations and narrative repetitiveness, saying viewers expected more investigative rigor and fresher material than Feldman provided; several critics called it “not totally awful” but underwhelming given the stakes, and noted that production values were sometimes comparable to higher-quality amateur videos [2]. Some reviews judged the film’s emotional beats as uneven and questioned whether it justified its crowdfunding claims and marketing [2] [5].
5. Family dispute and ethical questions — who has the right to tell the story?
Corey Haim’s mother and sister publicly disputed Feldman’s portrayal and the film’s allegations about Haim’s abuse, a family rebuke highlighted in reports and encyclopedic summaries that raised ethical questions about telling a deceased person’s alleged experience without that person’s testimony [3]. Rolling Stone and other outlets quoted critics who wondered if Feldman’s decision to speak for Haim was appropriate, given the family’s vehement opposition and the absence of on-record testimony from Haim himself [3].
6. Premiere turmoil and lingering controversies — spectacle and consequence
The film’s Los Angeles premiere and streaming rollout were accompanied by a chaotic public display—reports documented Feldman interrupting a screening and technical issues during the livestream—moments that amplified coverage of the film as not just content but spectacle, and which fed narratives about Feldman’s erratic promotion and the larger controversy over his accusations, including his public naming of at least one mainstream actor as an alleged abuser [3] [8]. That spectacle reinforced both supporters’ sense of urgency and critics’ doubts about credibility and method [3] [8].