Critics’ reviews

American History X (1998)

7 reviews from 7 publications. Critics’ score 63: 4 positive, 1 mixed, 2 negative.

Back to our review of American History X

63
Positive
4
Mixed
1
Negative
2

Most critics respond favourably to American History X, with praise clustering around Edward Norton’s forceful, convincing performance. Even the negative reviews find him compelling, making the central performance the clearest point of agreement. Several critics also credit the film’s powerful scenes and willingness to confront neo-Nazi racism directly. Sight and Sound gives particular weight to Edward Furlong’s performance and the force of the non-verbal sequences, while the more favourable reviews find enough dramatic power to outweigh the blunt storytelling.

The disagreement is substantial, and centres on whether that power compensates for a simplified account of racism. Reservations about obvious structure, reductive scripting and dramatic overkill recur even among supporters. The visual style divides critics too: some admire its force, while others find it distracting. The Los Angeles Times takes the strongest opposing position, arguing that the bombastic script and treatment of violence and hate speech undermine the film’s intended message.

RogerEbert.com
30 October 1998 · ★★★½/4 · Roger Ebert
88

The film is well-made with powerful scenes and strong performances, particularly Edward Norton's, but its structure is too obvious and it falls short of its potential. It remains a good and powerful movie despite underdeveloped elements like the prison conversion.

Read the full review →
Empire
26 March 1999 · Adam Smith
80*

The critic calls it a fine film with a towering central performance from Edward Norton that establishes him as a major talent. Norton's convincing portrayal of a racist who retains his humanity is singled out for praise amid some directorial flaws.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
1 May 1999 · Andrew O'Hehir
75*

The film is a work of impressive scale and craft that is hard to dismiss, with a structure resembling grand opera and powerful non-verbal tableaux. The extraordinary image-making and performances, especially Edward Furlong's as Danny, stand out amid some reductive scripting and dramatic overkill.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
28 October 1998 · Janet Maslin
70*

The film is an inflated yet gut-slugging work that addresses neo-Nazi culture with brutal candor, buoyed by fiery acting and provocative bombast from Edward Norton. Its willingness to confront ugly political realities gives it substance, even as its story elements feel reducible to a simple outline.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · WH
60*

The film has strength in its energetic opening and Norton's astounding performance but weakness in its would-be liberal drama that lurches from overkill to inertia. It holds interest through visuals and a feeling for the male reality of reactionary working-class environments.

Read the full review →
The Independent
25 March 1999
40*

The critic finds the drama about neo-Nazism facile and meretricious despite its worthy idea, with variable scripting and distracting visual style. Norton's magnetic performance is singled out as the sole reason to watch.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
28 October 1998 · Kenneth Turan
30*

Despite good intentions and a mesmerizing performance by Edward Norton, the film is a simplistic and unconvincing look at neo-Nazi racism that struggles to feel real. The script is bombastic and clumsy, and the director's razzle-dazzle approach to violence and hate speech undermines the message.

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