More from Wikipedia – 

The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reports a 91% approval rating with an average rating of 8.40/10, based on 66 critic reviews. The website’s critics consensus reads, “An ambitious meditation on grief and faith that is as gorgeous as it is unsettling, Midnight Mass’s slow boil is a triumph of terror that will leave viewers shaking—and thinking—long after the credits roll.”[19] Metacritic gave the series a weighted average score of 74 out of 100 based on 21 reviews, indicating “generally favorable reviews”.[20]

Critics praised Flanagan’s direction, the performances, and the series’ unique approach to the vampire genre. Kristen Baldwin of Entertainment Weekly gave the series an “A–” grade and wrote that it “isn’t perfect, but it is a keenly affecting, beautifully acted reflection on death, faith, guilt, addiction, and the power of free will.”[21] Judy Berman of Time gave it a very positive review, calling it Flanagan’s best series yet and praised the performances of Zach Gilford, Kate Siegel and especially Hamish Linklater.[22] Jen Chaney of Vulture called Linklater’s performance “phenomenal” and believed he elevated the series to “moments of greatness,” writing: “he speaks as if he’s discovering his way through every sentence and wants you to come with him.”[23] David Fear of Rolling Stone wrote, “the three-layers-deep work that Linklater is doing over these seven episodes is extraordinary.” Fear also praised Flanagan’s directing, stating that “It’s the way that [he] carefully sets everything into place in anticipation of a bigger-picture nightmare that makes the payoffs so satisfying.”[24] Richard Roeper of the Chicago Sun-Times called the series “the best Stephen King story Stephen King never wrote” and stated, “even though this is an original work from Flanagan, it feels like a high-level adaptation of a particularly haunting King novel.”[25]

The series’ writing and pace drew more mixed responses, with frequent criticism directed at the script’s perceived overabundance of monologues. Jack Seale of The Guardian gave the series three out of five stars, praising Flanagan’s filmmaking, but criticizing the series for its “bloated dialogue” stating that “When the end comes at last, there is a lot of fire and viscera, but no rapture.”[26] Brian Tallerico of RogerEbert.com gave the series two and a half stars out of five, further criticizing the dialogue and religious themes, stating that the series “can be a little exhausting in its preachiness.” Tallerico felt that the series’ emphasis on its philosophical themes came at the expense of its horror elements, writing, “most of the lengthy conversations are well-scripted, engaging enough in their dialogue, but they also drain a lot of the momentum from the piece.” He also criticized the series’ visual effects as “generally inferior to both Haunting projects,” stating “Flanagan has always worked better with shadows in the dark than when he has to reveal them.”[27]