Critics’ reviews

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)

14 reviews from 14 publications. Critics’ score 76: 11 positive, 1 mixed, 2 negative.

Back to our review of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid

76
Positive
11
Mixed
1
Negative
2

Most critics like it, and the ones writing decades after release like it best. The praise clusters on the Newman and Redford double act: the relaxed, straight-faced interplay between them is mentioned in nearly every review, and several call the film a buddy picture in western clothes rather than a western proper. William Goldman’s script is the next most praised element, described as witty, playful and quotable, with Conrad Hall’s photography and Burt Bacharach’s score picked out by more than one writer.

The spread is wide, and it runs along a line in time. The reviews from autumn 1969 are the coolest: The New York Times finds the genre-mixing slick but empty, Roger Ebert calls it slow and over-cute, and The New Yorker thinks the facetious tone rings false. Later writers concede some tweeness, a dated soundtrack and borrowings from The Wild Bunch, but treat those as small faults in something they find thoroughly likeable.

Radio Times
★★★★★ · David Parkinson
100

Director George Roy Hill's freewheeling, Oscar-winning comic western was one of the biggest box-office hits in the genre's history. It features the unforgettable pairing of Paul Newman and Robert Redford, whose exhilarating performances turn the ruthless real-life desperados into lovable rogues and ultimately tragic heroes.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2013 · Bob McCabe
90*

The critic praises the note-perfect performances by Newman and Redford, William Goldman's playful and insightful screenplay, and the film's memorable moments like the waterfall leap and elegiac ending. They conclude it may be the most likeable film ever made, despite some twee elements and its role in popularising the buddy movie.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
· David Wilson
90*

The film is immensely enjoyable to watch, glowingly photographed, wittily scripted, and features superbly confident performances from Paul Newman and Robert Redford. It plays as a buddy movie more than a traditional western, with a playful tone and relaxed double act from the leads.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
14 June 2006 · A- · Nathan Rabin
90

The review positions the film as the gold standard for modern buddy comedies, lauding its witty, irreverent dialogue and the charismatic performances of Newman and Redford that blend tragedy with fun and timeless star power.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
23 September 2019
90*

The critic finds the film a rollicking, spectacularly effective entertainment that still works well today. They single out the magical Newman-Redford chemistry, Goldman’s lively script, Bacharach’s score and Conrad Hall’s photography for particular praise.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
26 October 2014 · John Mahoney
90*

The critic calls it a great and exceptionally popular film, praising William Goldman's screenplay, the perfectly cast stars Paul Newman and Robert Redford, George Roy Hill's direction, and innovative techniques like the score, cinematography, and editing that sustain its legendary aura.

Read the full review →
The Telegraph
21 January 2015
90*

The review calls the film great entertainment that remains fresh and mould-breaking. It singles out the quirky, convention-defying approach, gorgeous locations and the three attractive leads for praise.

Read the full review →
Variety
10 September 1969 · Whitney Williams
80*

A lighthearted near-comedy with strong exploitation potential and star power that sustains interest through episodic structure and satisfying direction. Technical credits, especially photography and score, are superior.

Read the full review →
Time Out
16 January 2012 · RM
75*

Redford and Newman star in one of the funniest if slightest Westerns of recent years, with an often hilarious script and strong interplay between the stars. It is unashamedly escapist but borrows heavily from The Wild Bunch and other films, making it slightly the worse for some of those influences.

Read the full review →
The Times
6 February 1970 · John Russell Taylor
70*

The critic finds it a thoroughly and determinedly entertaining film that is hard to fault and keeps the audience constantly amused. They single out the pokey, cooler-than-cool script and the straight-faced performances of Newman and Redford, while noting that the constant diversion leaves the film without a clear centre.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
25 September 1969 · Vincent Canby
50*

Hill and Goldman mix genres in a slick but empty way, with signs of a better film behind the gags. Strong performances and handsome production are undermined by technical tricks and a gnawing emptiness.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
13 October 1969 · Roger Ebert
40*

The film is slow and disappointing despite good laughs and performances. The bloated production and overly cute script undermine what could have been a strong Western.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
27 September 1969
30*

The facetious Western rings false with comical dialogue and an embarrassing tone that the director cannot pull off. It will likely be a hit due to the title and stars but lacks substance.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
13 June 2006 · Sarah Artt
80*

The pairing of Newman's quick-witted Cassidy and Redford's brooding Sundance makes for a classic buddy formula that still feels fresh and amusing decades later. The film is well-paced and masterful overall, though the dated soundtrack and one uneasy scene involving sexual tension are minor flaws.

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