roger ebert gave the film 1.5 stars out of four and wrote, "this plot is so simple (and has been told so many times before), that perhaps the most amazing achievement of 'raw deal' is its ability to screw it up. this movie didn't just happen to be a mess; the filmmakers had to work to make it so confusing." vincent canby of "the new york times" wrote that the film "isn't exactly oscar material. it does nothing for the cause of nonviolence. it will warm the hearts of gun lobbyists everywhere, and its final body count may be even higher than that in mr. stallone's 'cobra.' yet 'raw deal' somehow manages to be measurably less offensive. at times, it's almost funny — intentionally." todd mccarthy of "variety" reported, "comic book crime meller suffers from an irredeemably awful script, and even director john irvin's engaging sense of how absurd the proceedings are can't work an alchemist's magic." writing in the "los angeles times", sheila benson began, "has it come to this? that we can feel vaguely cheered that "raw deal" (citywide), where the bodies again pile up like cordwood, is a better made movie than "cobra"?" however, she praised schwarzenegger, saying that his strength as an actor is "not that he can toss grown men over ceiling beams, but that he has a vein of sweetness and self-deprecation that no amount of mayhem can obliterate ... it has shone from him since "pumping iron", it has allowed him to surmount silly and unwise pieces of action (such as the drunk scenes in one of the "conans" and here), and even his own awkwardness as an actor." gene siskel of the "chicago tribune" gave the film 1 star out of 4 and noted that it had "essentially the same story" as "cobra", "but it is told with so many superfluous characters that we're never really sure whose side a few key people are on. needless to say, in a film filled with punch-outs, we very quickly don't care." paul attanasio of "the washington post" dismissed the film as "a mostly tedious, cheaply made shoot-em-up" that "recycles the clichés that have long been the cud of television cop dramas." pauline kael of "the new yorker" called it "reprehensible and enjoyable, the kind of movie that makes you feel brain dead after two minutes—after which point you're ready to laugh at its mixture of trashiness, violence, and startlingly silly crude humor."