Critics’ reviews

Backdraft (1991)

7 reviews from 7 publications. Critics’ score 57: 1 positive, 4 mixed, 2 negative.

Back to our review of Backdraft

57
Positive
1
Mixed
4
Negative
2

The reviews lean towards a mixed verdict on Backdraft, with praise clustering around the fire effects rather than the people caught among them. Across the available commentary, the firefighting scenes are repeatedly described as thrilling, convincing and unpredictable. Even the less favourable reviews find substantial visual excitement here. The central reservation is that the surrounding drama struggles to match those sequences, relying on familiar plotting and heavy melodrama.

The spread is appreciable: some critics find the spectacle enough to sustain an entertaining film, while others find the storytelling too weak to overlook. Radio Times offers the clearest endorsement, crediting Howard with managing the sprawling story despite its lack of originality. At the less favourable end, the Los Angeles Times finds the characters thin and the cast underused. The disagreement centres on how much dramatic weakness the fire scenes can compensate for.

Radio Times
★★★★ · John Ferguson
80

Ferguson considers the film a sturdy, accomplished mainstream hit despite its unoriginal plot. He praises Howard’s skillful handling of the sprawling story and the exhilarating fire footage.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
24 May 1991 · Janet Maslin
64*

The page could not be accessed, so the critic’s verdict is unavailable. No praise or complaint can be verified from the page text provided.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
24 May 1991 · ★★½/4 · Roger Ebert
62

Ebert finds the film an uneven but entertaining tribute to firefighters. He praises its fiery spectacle, while faulting the melodrama for competing with the firefighting story.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· CM
61*

The accessible page identifies this as a review, but its verdict is not visible. The standfirst criticizes the screenplay’s football-team analogy for firefighting.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2011 · Angie Errigo
55*

Errigo finds the drama hokey but says the film remains entertaining. She singles out the spectacular fire effects as its main attraction.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
24 May 1991 · Kenneth Turan
40*

Turan finds the film visually thrilling but dramatically conventional and emotionally unconvincing. He especially praises the spectacular, unpredictable fire effects, while criticizing the thin characterization and underused cast.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1990 · Variety Staff
40*

The review finds the film visually exhilarating but shapeless and weighed down by corny melodrama. It praises the fire scenes for their terrifying believability and sci-fi grandeur.

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