Critics’ reviews

Flubber (1997)

7 reviews from 7 publications. Critics’ score 59: 1 positive, 5 mixed, 1 negative.

Back to our review of Flubber

59
Positive
1
Mixed
5
Negative
1

Most critics find Flubber pleasant, good-natured family entertainment, and most stop there. The praise clusters on the effects: the computer-generated flubber is singled out as lively and well integrated with the story, and even the harsher reviews credit the effects artists with the film’s best work. Robin Williams gets a steady, modest round of approval, and one review notes a more restrained performance than he usually gives.

The reservations are about everything around the green stuff. Several reviews find the story thin and the set-up familiar, and the comedy itself is judged to fall short more often than it lands. The spread is moderate rather than wide: five of the seven land in the middle, with Variety the only firm recommendation and Eye for Film the only outright dismissal, finding the film story-poor and tired despite its effects. Roger Ebert sits between them, finding little beyond Williams’s energy to enjoy.

Variety
21 November 1997 · Joe Leydon
70*

Leydon finds the film funny, brisk family entertainment and an unusually successful Disney remake. He especially praises the lively, computer-generated Flubber and the integration of its effects with the story.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Caroline Westbrook
65*

Westbrook finds the film pleasant, good-natured entertainment, though its story and effects feel familiar. She singles out its entertaining set pieces and restrained sentimentality as its strengths.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
26 November 1997 · Janet Maslin
64*

The review text is inaccessible, so its verdict cannot be established. No praise or complaint can be reliably identified from the available page.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· WH
64*

The page identifies this as a film review, but the review text is unavailable. Its verdict and any specific praise or complaint cannot be determined.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · John Ferguson
60

Ferguson describes the film as a smart update of the original, though the three-star rating suggests a qualified verdict. He singles out its sophisticated special effects as part of the remake’s appeal.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
26 November 1997 · ★★/4 · Roger Ebert
50

Ebert gives the film a mixed-to-negative verdict. He finds little to praise beyond Robin Williams's energetic performance, while the comedy itself falls short.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
19 January 2001 · Angus Wolfe Murray
30*

The critic finds the film story-poor and stylistically tired, despite its impressive effects. He praises Robin Williams’s restrained performance and the effects artists’ work with the flubber.

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