Critics’ reviews

Disclosure (1994)

7 reviews from 7 publications. Critics’ score 54: 1 positive, 4 mixed, 2 negative.

Back to our review of Disclosure

54
Positive
1
Mixed
4
Negative
2

Most critics land in the middle on Disclosure, treating it as a glossy, competently made thriller that takes a provocative subject and handles it shallowly. The reviews agree it is watchable: Empire calls it tightly directed entertainment, and Roger Ebert, though mixed, finds the sexual harassment premise compelling even when the storytelling is not. Where praise clusters is odd for a thriller: the Los Angeles Times picks out the office design and the virtual-reality sequences as surprising highlights, and Empire the chemistry between Michael Douglas and Demi Moore.

The spread is wide. Reservations gather around the plotting, which the Los Angeles Times calls muddled and short of creative passion, and around the film’s seriousness about corporate power and sexual politics, which Radio Times finds self-important and unintentionally funny. The New Yorker goes furthest, calling it tasteful and bland, with Douglas’s painfully ambivalent turn in the central sex scene its one camp pleasure. Two of the seven reviews cannot be read in full.

Empire
1 January 2000 · Ian Nathan
70*

Nathan finds the film glossy, tightly directed entertainment, despite its shallow handling of sexual harassment and corporate intrigue. He singles out the chemistry between Michael Douglas and Demi Moore as a strength.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
9 December 1994
64*

The page content is blocked, so the critic’s verdict cannot be determined. No specific praise or complaint can be verified from the available text.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· TCh
64*

The available page identifies this as a review but does not reveal the critic’s verdict. Its visible description introduces the workplace conflict over a promotion and an old flame.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
9 December 1994 · ★★½/4 · Roger Ebert
62

Ebert gives the film a mixed verdict. He singles out its treatment of sexual harassment as a compelling subject, though the story’s execution is less persuasive.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
9 December 1994 · Kenneth Turan
50*

Turan finds the film adequately entertaining but undercut by muddled plot points and a lack of creative passion. He singles out the office design and virtual-reality visuals as surprising highlights.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★ · Adrian Turner
40

Turner finds the thriller self-important and unintentionally funny. He criticizes its attempt to address corporate power and sexual equality.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
11 December 1994 · Terrence Rafferty
25*

Rafferty finds the film tasteful, bland, and only mildly entertaining. He singles out Michael Douglas’s painfully ambivalent performance in the central sex scene as its campy highlight.

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