Critics’ reviews

Highlander (1986)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 63: 1 positive, 5 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of Highlander

63
Positive
1
Mixed
5
Negative
0

The consensus is mixed: most critics find Highlander muddled and excessive, but several enjoy its sword fights, eccentric fantasy premise and willingness to be ridiculous. Praise clusters around the combat, with striking backdrops and energetic direction helping the action survive the storytelling. Sean Connery’s supporting turn is a recurring pleasure, bringing style and camp humour. The Queen soundtrack supplies outsized emotion for some, though it does not make the story engaging for others.

The chief reservation is coherence: the jumps between eras and genres leave several critics struggling to care about what happens. There is less agreement about pace, which the reviews describe as both frenzied and plodding. Empire enjoys Clancy Brown’s villain, while Variety finds him unimpressive. The Guardian is notably warmer than most, treating the deadpan comedy and eccentric ambition as reasons to embrace the silliness rather than merely tolerate it.

The Guardian
30 April 2026
80*

The critic finds the preposterous time-romp highly enjoyable if met on its own terms, describing its galloping silliness as uniquely quirky, funny and eccentrically ambitious. They single out the deadpan black comedy and the film's eccentric ambition for praise.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
24 March 2011 · Scott Tobias
65*

The critic finds the film cheesy, plodding, badly written, and showily directed but ultimately not a piece of shit because it delivers on epic swordfights set against striking backdrops, the outsized emotions of the Queen soundtrack, and the grand man-of-destiny sweep of its immortal fantasy concept.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · Tom Hutchinson
60

The film is described as so confused as to be hilariously watchable, wavering between sci-fi, horror and music video styles, with strong sword-fighting duels singled out for praise. The story is called out as never fully engaging despite the Queen soundtrack.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · RR
60*

The critic notes that narrative coherence is not Mulcahy's strength in this tale of immortals in combat across eras, with the film hopping between medieval Scotland and modern America. It is praised for its energy, frenzied pace and preposterous fun, even if it does not fully hang together.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Chris Hewitt
50*

The critic finds that the film has aged poorly, with a muddled narrative and sub-MTV visuals wasting a fine premise. They single out the enjoyable villain Clancy Brown and well-choreographed fight scenes for praise, despite overall clumsiness.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
8 March 1986 · Walter Goodman

The film is an overblown, nonsensical tale told with noise and flash that keeps exploding for nearly two hours with nothing at stake. Sean Connery brings dash and style to his brief role as Ramirez before the proceedings collapse.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1985 · ** · Variety Staff

The picture is a mishmash as the director jumps genres and eras without coherence, resulting in confusion. Lambert and Brown fail to impress while Connery offers a campy but welcome supporting turn.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
8 July 2012 · Jennie Kermode
60*

The critic praises the film's bold attempt to modernize the fantasy genre through energetic direction and strong casting, especially Clancy Brown as the villain, while noting its cult appeal despite a silly plot and uneven execution.

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