Critics’ reviews

Almost Famous (2000)

10 reviews from 10 publications. Critics’ score 62: 4 positive, 1 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of Almost Famous

62
Positive
4
Mixed
1
Negative
3

The reviews lean favourable, though affection for Almost Famous is far from unanimous. Praise centres on the warmth of Crowe’s coming-of-age story, its feel for music and fandom, and an engaging ensemble that makes the backstage encounters persuasive. Supporters find humour and emotional generosity in its nostalgia, valuing the personal observations and fondness for the characters more than any promise of rock excess.

The split is wide, and the film’s sweetness is the chief dividing point: admirers find it touching, while detractors see sentimentality that avoids difficult consequences. Reservations also concern loose storytelling, mild drama and an uncertain balance between nostalgia and satire. The Guardian argues that the film drains rock of danger, while making an exception for Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Lester Bangs. Sight and Sound likewise praises the journalism and Bangs material, but finds the treatment of the scene’s sex and drugs too coy.

RogerEbert.com
15 September 2000 · ★★★★/4 · Roger Ebert
100

The film is a lovely, funny and touching coming-of-age story about a teenage rock journalist on tour with a band. It captures the era's idealism and commerce with gratitude and hope.

Read the full review →
Time Out
16 May 2012 · NB
80*

Crowe's quasi-autobiographical story is a sweet-minded, picaresque yarn that diffuses moral questions into harmony while offering stacked attractions and memorable performances. The critic singles out the engaging cast and overall charm as its main strengths.

Read the full review →
Variety
8 September 2000
75*

The film is a sweetly amiable memoir of a boy's coming of age with rock 'n' roll that is more gentle and modestly insightful than exhilarating. It is eager to please and does so through its credible personal observations and affection for its characters.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
11 September 2000 · David Denby
60*

The quasi-autobiographical film is likable with easy affection for its characters and scene but is awfully mild and amorphous. It is underdramatized and irresolute, caught between nostalgia and satire.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
1 January 2001 · John Wrathall
40*

The film captures the music and fandom well but is overly sweet and nostalgic, shying away from the sex, drugs and honesty of the rock scene. The critic singles out the portrayal of rock journalism and the mentor figure Lester Bangs for praise amid broader complaints about coyness and sentimentality.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
2 May 2001 · Ed Gonzalez
30*

The critic finds the film a self-absorbed vehicle for baby-boomer nostalgia that prioritizes cozy reminiscence over substance. He singles out the overly blissful tone and avoidance of real dramatic consequences for complaint.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
9 February 2001 · Peter Bradshaw
30*

The critic finds the film a bafflingly heavy-handed coming-of-age nostalgia-fest that pulls the teeth from rock music and turns it into a heart-warming morality tale about family values. It lacks the danger, excitement and insight of Spinal Tap, though Philip Seymour Hoffman's performance as Lester Bangs stands out.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · David Hepworth

The critic praises the film as a convincing, good-hearted account of rock 'n' roll backstage life based on Crowe's experiences. They single out the perfect details captured, including the music and ensemble performances.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
13 September 2000 · Critic's Pick · A. O. Scott

Crowe devotes the movie to his love of rock 'n' roll and opens up his own sweet, forgiving soul. It teems with high-spirited life despite being shaggier than his previous work.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
5 October 2006 · Scott Macdonald
90*

The critic calls it the best film of 2000 and an immaculate time capsule of rock music, youth and positive dreams. He singles out the infectious period detail and the central performances, especially Patrick Fugit's earnest William and Kate Hudson's luminous Penny Lane.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate