Ramirez (Sean Connery) stands with Connor MacLeod (Christopher Lambert) on a rocky shore
Film review

Highlander

1986 · Directed by Russell Mulcahy · 1h 56m

In a sentenceImmortality gives these men centuries to calm down, and none of them takes the opportunity

Connor MacLeod (Christopher Lambert) is an immortal caught in a conflict that stretches across centuries. Moving between Scotland’s past and modern America, Highlander follows rivals who settle their differences with swords. MacLeod faces the Kurgan (Clancy Brown), while Sean Connery plays Ramirez. Roxanne Hart plays Brenda Wyatt and Beatie Edney plays Heather MacLeod in an adventure that brings an old form of combat into a modern setting. The immortals have more time than most to settle their differences, but their struggle leaves little prospect of peaceful coexistence: there can be only one.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Russell Mulcahy’s immortal sword fighters are better company than the muddled storytelling deserves. Clancy Brown supplies an enjoyably excessive villain, and the fights make Highlander worth an evening for anyone inclined towards extravagant fantasy.

Russell Mulcahy’s Highlander asks us to take immortal men with swords seriously, and gets further with that request than its writing deserves. It is good, unruly fantasy, strongest when a fight is imminent and least persuasive when somebody has to explain things. The movement between Scotland’s past and modern America gives the combat a reach that a single adventure could not. Mulcahy wants the old-fashioned grandeur and the modern noise together, and rarely gives either a rest.

Christopher Lambert’s Connor MacLeod is not a particularly easy hero to warm to. His reserved performance suits a man set apart by immortality, though it also leaves some scenes short of the feeling the film plainly wants from them. Sean Connery, as Ramirez, is more immediately engaging, bringing enough amusement to his part to make the fantasy feel comfortable to inhabit. He knows how far to push the grand manner before it becomes tiresome, a useful skill in this company.

Clancy Brown pushes further as the Kurgan, and the film benefits from having someone so committed to being objectionable. His broad performance remains threatening, which is harder to manage than he makes it look. We laughed at his extravagance, then found ourselves taking him seriously as an opponent. He supplies the hostility that Lambert’s more distant performance needs, and makes the central rivalry easy to grasp.

Gerry Fisher’s photography keeps the backdrops prominent in the sword fights, giving the duels a size that the writing has not always earned. The choreography lets us follow the blades and register their threat. Allan Cameron’s production design makes the Scottish and American settings distinct at a glance, a useful service when the storytelling gets tangled. We were properly excited by the sword fights, despite having lost patience with the explanations.

Peter Honess’s editing carries the energy of the fights into the jumps between periods, where it is less helpful. The film keeps moving, yet there are passages when that movement leaves us unsure what we are meant to care about. Michael Kamen’s score helps the confrontations feel solemn, though the Queen songs make the stronger impression. They let the feelings swell beyond anything the dialogue can manage, and that excess suits Mulcahy’s determination to take everything seriously.

The screenplay, credited to Gregory Widen, Peter Bellwood and Larry Ferguson, leaves too much awkward connective business around a premise that needs little selling. Characters can sound as though they are keeping the story supplied with information rather than talking to someone they know. Fantasy can survive unexplained rules; it struggles when explanations are dull and the action has to win back our attention afterwards. There are stretches here when the next sword fight feels overdue.

The sword-and-sorcery pleasure here is fairly simple: grown people commit themselves to extravagant behaviour without constantly signalling that they know it looks absurd. Mulcahy takes the fantasy seriously enough for its grand emotions to have a chance, even when the dialogue is poor. That commitment makes the silliness more enjoyable, though it cannot clear up the plot. Choose it for the fights and the villain; anyone wanting an orderly account of immortality should make other arrangements.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

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 →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Highlander worth watching?
Highlander is worth an evening for anyone who enjoys extravagant sword-and-sorcery fantasy, and we scored it 75. The fights, Sean Connery's amusement and Clancy Brown's enjoyably excessive villain carry it; the tangled storytelling and dull explanations do not. Anyone wanting an orderly account of immortality should look elsewhere.
How long is Highlander, and what is it rated?
Highlander runs 1h 56m. It is an adventure and action film.
Where can I watch Highlander in Ecuador?
Highlander is not on any streaming or rental service in Ecuador at the moment. It is available in 28 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.
How violent or frightening is Highlander, and is it suitable for children?
Highlander carries a UK 15 certificate, and its immortals settle their differences with swords, so the violence is frequent and meant to threaten. It is not suitable for younger children. Teenagers of fifteen and over who can take duels fought to the death should find it more rousing than frightening.
What should I watch after Highlander?
After Highlander, try A Chinese Ghost Story (1987, Fi1m 82): Supernatural romance and energetic combat, with a more agile sense of humour. Then The Green Knight (2021, Fi1m 78): A slower journey through myth, with more room for doubt and dread.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. The Duellists (1977) · not reviewed yetFor sword fights whose danger grows out of patience, pride and obsession.

  2. A Chinese Ghost Story (1987, Fi1m 82)Supernatural romance and energetic combat, with a more agile sense of humour.

  3. Ladyhawke (1985) · not reviewed yetAnother solemn fantasy romance that makes an unlikely spell worth caring about.

  4. Brotherhood of the Wolf (2001) · not reviewed yetPeriod adventure, extravagant fighting and a similar refusal to keep things modest.

  5. The Green Knight (2021, Fi1m 78)A slower journey through myth, with more room for doubt and dread.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever