Critics’ reviews

Hero (2002)

10 reviews from 10 publications. We need six from publications we count before we show a critics’ score; there are 4 so far.

Back to our review of Hero

4 of 6
Positive
2
Mixed
2
Negative
0
Screen Daily
6 January 2003
75*

The critic calls it an intoxicatingly beautiful, structurally enigmatic and brief epic that will struggle against Crouching Tiger comparisons in the West due to its cold, stately storytelling and lack of sentiment. They single out the breathtaking cinematography by Chris Doyle and the inventive fight choreography.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· NB
65*

The review describes it as a luscious martial-arts rhapsody with pomp, panache and narrative puzzles that paints imperial history as a cartoonish romantic pageant, praising the sumptuous colour-coded visuals and extravagant style while noting the political proposition feels fascistic.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
26 September 2004 · Philip French
50*

The critic finds the film graceful and visually stylish but ultimately inconsequential, lacking the magic and moral power of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. He singles out its nationalist message that endorses trust in powerful rulers and justifies sacrifice for order as an unpleasant aspect.

Read the full review →
Empire
· Adam Smith

The critic calls Hero the real deal compared to Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, praising its breathtaking visuals, balletic fight sequences and colour-drenched cinematography by Christopher Doyle. The plot is seen as a minor weakness, flimsy and overly simplistic despite an intriguing political subtext.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
10 April 2012 · Derek Malcolm

The review highlights Hero as a visually spectacular and popular hit with stunning action, star power and impressive cinematography, though the complicated story and apparent endorsement of totalitarianism are noted as drawbacks. It positions the film as a colourful, balletic spectacle ready for Western audiences.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
26 August 2004 · Roger Ebert

The critic calls the film beautiful and beguiling, a martial arts extravaganza that defines fighters' styles and lives within Chinese tradition while using a Rashomon-like structure of multiple viewpoints. Zhang Yimou creates a visual poem of extraordinary beauty with spectacular sets, costumes and effects that move the genre into poetry, ballet and philosophy.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
6 April 2003 · festival review

Zhang's film is elliptical and primal, using a Rashomon-like structure and dazzling color-coded sequences to explore history, sensuality, and Taoist principles in a spiritually profound way.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
17 August 2004 · Scott Tobias

The film delivers striking visual set pieces and technical mastery as a wuxia epic but feels like a sellout with a weightless patriotic story that lacks the purposeful edge of Zhang's earlier work.

Read the full review →
Paste
1 August 2004 · Robert Davis
75*

The critic praises Zhang Yimou’s elegant martial-arts epic for its painterly use of color, visual flair in fight sequences, and exploration of pacifism through the tension between sword and pen. Some themes like Chinese unification are treated too lightly, and certain character elements feel underdeveloped.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
24 September 2004 · Angus Wolfe Murray

The critic finds the film visually dazzling but criticizes its convoluted, impossible-to-follow story that prioritizes spectacle over substance. They single out the exaggerated flying fight sequences and balletic beauty for praise while noting the operatic overindulgence.

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