--- title: "Big Fish: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/big-fish/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/big-fish" critics_score: 58 critics_reviews: 9 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Big Fish (2003): what the critics said Critics' score 58 from 9 reviews: 4 positive, 0 mixed, 5 negative. The reviews are sharply divided on Big Fish, with a slight lean towards disappointment rather than a settled consensus. Praise centres on Burton’s fantastical imagery and the warmth of his tall tales: supporters find that his visual imagination serves a touching story about family, truth and the value of make-believe. Empire welcomes the connection between his familiar style and broader emotional concerns, while the Evening Standard singles out Albert Finney’s range and emotional force. The disagreement is largely over whether that warmth earns its sentimentality. Slant Magazine finds the film moving without being manipulative, but detractors repeatedly describe the fantasy as soft, the father-son drama as laboured and Burton’s usual darkness as diminished. The spread is wide: admirers embrace the gentleness that others find dull. Time Out raises a distinct objection to the treatment of history and gender roles, alongside its dissatisfaction with the humour and emotion. ## The AV Club — Nathan Rabin Rating A-. 9 December 2003. Burton rebounds strongly with a visual feast and emotional power that recalls Edward Scissorhands. The film makes a strong case for the life-affirming power of make-believe through its generous spirit and fantastical storytelling. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/big-fish-1798199160) ## Empire — William Thomas Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). The film aligns Burton's visual style with a story that has more than one foot in the real world, resulting in charming, witty and warm-hearted filmmaking. It is praised for transcending Burton's usual world to connect with wider emotional concerns about family and truth. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/big-fish-review/) ## Slant Magazine — Ed Gonzalez Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 22 November 2003. Big Fish is a sentimental but never manipulative nonsecular tall tale about the desire to live with wonderment. Burton's fantastical set pieces and images, saturated with love, single out the power of myth over reason in illuminating family connections and spirituality. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/big-fish/) ## Evening Standard — Will Self Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 10 April 2012. Burton reaches an apogee with this tale of tall tales and father-son reconciliation. Albert Finney's performance is singled out as the standout, delivering a broad range of emotions that moves even a jaded critic. [Read the review](https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/film/magical-mythical-tour-7437554.html) ## Radio Times — Brian Pendreigh Rating 2/5. The film drifts colourfully along but ultimately lacks the edge that made Edward Scissorhands so powerful and strange. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-7k1hpg/big-fish/) ## The Independent — Nicholas Barber Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 25 January 2004. The critic finds the fantastical flashbacks full of expected wonders but too fluffy and innocuous to grip tightly. The present-day father-son reconciliation theme is overdone and the film is ultimately a disappointment. [Read the review](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/big-fishgame-over-kasparov-and-the-machinescary-movie-3-75414.html) ## The Guardian — Peter Bradshaw Fi1m's normalised score 35/100 (inferred from the text). 23 January 2004. Bradshaw finds the film not weird enough, with Burton's fantasy decaffeinated into a cutesy family drama that lacks edge or dark side. He criticizes the sentimental ending and calls the result a tiny bit dull. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/News_Story/Critic_Review/Guardian_review/0,,1128909,00.html) ## Time Out — GA Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 29 February 2012. The critic finds the film not funny, illuminating, insightful or moving, criticizing its portrayal of history and gender roles. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/big-fish) ## Los Angeles Times — Manohla Dargis 10 December 2003. Burton's wistful film about fathers, sons and tall tales showcases his imagination in fantastical scenarios, making it the straightest entry in his repertoire. The shift to family melodrama and the son's reproach drags it down, though Jessica Lange brightens those sections. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-dec-10-et-dargis10-story.html) ## Screen Daily 1 December 2003. A gently whimsical tale of reconciliation and fabulism that is the director's most sentimental piece to date, repositioning him as a mainstream filmmaker. [Read the review](https://www.screendaily.com/big-fish/4016278.article) ## The New Yorker — Anthony Lane 8 December 2003. The film risks mush with its sentimental picaresque and nervous fantasizing that undercuts Burton's usual wit, feeling like a softening up rather than growth. Some Burton-esque moments stand out, but the overall approach to tall tales and the circus trope disappoints. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/15/his-story-her-story) ## The New York Times — A. O. Scott 10 December 2003. The critic finds the magical-realist fable thin and soft, with unpersuasive inventions despite some startling scenes. Burton's visual sensibility is praised but the storytelling falters and the film proves ultimately forgettable. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/10/movies/film-review-hook-line-and-sinker-a-life-of-telling-tall-tales.html) ## The Times — Cosmo Landesman Rating One star. 25 January 2004. Landesman says Burton tries too hard to repeat the past and the film ends up crushed under the weight of its own whimsy, with the father/son conflict never taking off. He calls it a comeback attempt that falls flat. [Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/article/film-fishing-for-a-little-inspiration-9c6325bmvhz) ## Eye for Film — Angus Wolfe Murray Rating 1.5/5. 22 January 2004. The critic laments the film's excessive sentimentality, which he believes has stripped Burton of his signature darkness, and declares it a failure on every level that wastes its talented cast. He singles out the dysfunctional father-son relationship and the jarring contrast between the realistic and fantastical elements for particular criticism. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/big-fish-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/big-fish.md