Janet Maslin from The New York Times gave the film a negative review, writing, "The only respect in which it matches Mr. Cronenberg's Fly is in its sheer repulsiveness, since this film degenerates into a series of slime-ridden, glop-oozing special effects in its final half hour." Richard Harrington from The Washington Post offered the film similar criticism, calling the film's script "flat", and criticized the film's special effects as being "clumsy". Author and film critic Leonard Maltin awarded the film his lowest rating, calling the film "Alternately dull and messy but mostly dull". David Hughes from Empire awarded the film 3/5 stars, writing, "Whilst this fly is not as tightly scripted or keenly directed as its parent, it does have pace, breathless tension and the sort of gross-out effects that rules out kebabs for some time after the credits have rolled." Ryan Lambie of Den of Geek wrote that while the film "wasn't particularly clever,... as an exercise in pure, claret-stained entertainment, it deserves far more credit than it frequently receives".