---
title: "Moulin Rouge!"
year: 2001
kind: "film"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/moulin-rouge"
fi1m_id: "moulin-rouge"
imdb_id: "tt0203009"
tmdb_id: 824
wikidata_id: "Q193573"
fi1m_score: 75
critics_score: 60
critics_reviews: 7
published: "2026-09-14"
updated: "2026-09-18T08:38:27.757483+00:00"
region: "US"
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Moulin Rouge! (2001)

Directed by Baz Luhrmann · 2h 08m · MPA PG-13 · Drama, Romance, Music

## Identity

Moulin Rouge!

- **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/moulin-rouge
- **Type:** Film
- **Fi1m ID:** moulin-rouge
- **IMDb ID:** tt0203009
- **TMDB ID:** 824
- **Wikidata ID:** Q193573
- **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0203009/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/824, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q193573

**Fi1m score: 75** · Critics 60 from 7 reviews

*In a sentence:* We fell for the singers and wanted to confiscate the zoom lens

> Baz Luhrmann’s pop musical is worth the commotion for Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor, who make its romance matter. The rapid cutting is a persistent nuisance, especially when there is so much in the frame worth examining.

## Synopsis

In Paris in 1899, Christian (Ewan McGregor) and Satine (Nicole Kidman) are at the centre of an impossible romance. Their story unfolds through musical numbers built from pop songs that belong to other times, with familiar lyrics becoming declarations of love. Around them are Toulouse-Lautrec (John Leguizamo), Harold Zidler (Jim Broadbent) and the Duke (Richard Roxburgh). Baz Luhrmann directs and co-writes with Craig Pearce, placing the characters in a fantasy version of the city. Song, performance and romantic melodrama shape a story in which the lovers struggle to be together.

## Review

Baz Luhrmann’s *Moulin Rouge* is a good musical with an exhausting habit of interrupting its own pleasures. It takes an impossible romance in a fantasy Paris and fills it with pop songs that have no business belonging to 1899. The idea is simple enough: familiar songs let us recognise what these lovers feel without requiring much explanation. It is worth the commotion, though anyone hoping to watch a musical number unfold without constant visual interference will have a difficult evening.

The central pairing does most of the persuading. Nicole Kidman’s Satine and Ewan McGregor’s Christian need to convince us that declarations this large can come from people who mean them, and their singing does that. We were moved more than we expected when they sang to one another, because the chemistry between them made the borrowed words sound personal. They give the romance enough warmth to survive a style that might otherwise make the whole thing seem like an elaborate joke.

Donald McAlpine’s colour photography makes this Paris look proudly artificial, which suits the songs’ disregard for the calendar. Catherine Martin’s production design is crowded with decoration, giving us plenty to examine even when the story is doing something familiar. The extravagance works because the setting looks ready for people to break into song. The crash zooms are less helpful: they repeatedly redirect our attention when the scenery has already given it somewhere interesting to settle.

Jill Bilcock’s editing is the more persistent problem. A musical needs some time for a voice, a face or a movement to hold our attention, and here the next image so often arrives before the present one has registered. Speed can make a number exhilarating, but it cannot keep doing so indefinitely. Luhrmann too often treats a pause as something that must be prevented. Over 128 minutes, that insistence becomes tiring, especially when we would gladly spend longer looking at the people he has cast.

The music is more persuasive than the visual bustle. Craig Armstrong’s music supports the romance’s emotional excess, and the familiar pop material gives the lovers a language we already understand. Recognising a tune can become a substitute for listening to what a character is saying, and some combinations are too pleased with their own cleverness. But when Kidman and McGregor make those songs sound like things they need to say, we stop listening for the next reference and pay attention to the singing.

The screenplay by Luhrmann and Craig Pearce is less inventive than the presentation, relying on a familiar love story and characters drawn to be understood quickly. That limits how much the drama can surprise us, though it is hardly an unusual bargain for a musical. Jim Broadbent’s Harold Zidler benefits from that broadness; Broadbent gives the supporting performance enough comic confidence to compete with the scenery. Richard Roxburgh’s Duke is less rewarding, with a characterisation that rarely invites a second thought.

A fondness for musical melodrama will help; a tolerance for rapid cutting may be essential. There is enough feeling in the singing to make that bargain worthwhile for us. Choose it when a quiet love story would not quite do.

*Fi1m score 75, published 14 September 2026.*

## What the critics say

The reviews lean positive, but agreement centres more on Baz Luhrmann’s visual ambition than on the success of his musical. Praise clusters around the elaborate fantasy Paris, the energetic musical numbers and the use of familiar pop songs in an unfamiliar setting. Supporters also find romance and feeling beneath the spectacle, with Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor drawing praise for their chemistry, acting and singing.

The spread is wide, and the central disagreement is whether all that activity strengthens the love story or prevents it from registering. Film Comment regards Luhrmann’s approach as a successful revival of the musical; The Independent argues that his restless direction undermines the song-and-dance storytelling the genre needs. Other reservations concern exhausting pacing, intrusive visual tricks and a lack of emotional depth. Even some favourable reviews acknowledge that the same extravagance which delights admirers can wear an audience down.

## Straight answers

**How long is Moulin Rouge!, and what is it rated?**

*Moulin Rouge!* runs 2h 08m and is rated PG-13 by the MPA in the US. It is a drama and romance film.

**Where can I watch Moulin Rouge! in the US?**

*Moulin Rouge!* is available to rent from Amazon Prime Video from $3.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.

**What should I watch after Moulin Rouge!?**

After *Moulin Rouge!*, try [*The Umbrellas of Cherbourg*](https://film.one/film/the-umbrellas-of-cherbourg) (1964, Fi1m 88): For lovers whose feelings become more convincing once ordinary conversation gives way. Then [*Cabaret*](https://film.one/film/cabaret) (1972, Fi1m 88): Another theatrical romance, with sharper politics and considerably less faith in love; and [*The Red Shoes*](https://film.one/film/the-red-shoes) (1948, Fi1m 92): For colour, theatrical obsession and dancing given the space to hold us.

### Reviews we read (12)

- **Film Comment**, Kent Jones (85/100, inferred): The critic praises Baz Luhrmann for successfully resurrecting the musical genre with outrageously styled visuals, songs spanning pop music history, and a classic impossible-love story set in 1899 Paris. The result is described as a magnificent confection. [Read](https://www.filmcomment.com/issue/may-june-2001/)
- **Radio Times**, Andrew Collins (4/5): The critic calls it an opulent, no-holds-barred musical drama and a singular achievement, wrapped in an audacious mix of songs and near-insane visual ambition that viewers will either love or find exhausting. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-b9u4rw/moulin-rouge/)
- **The New York Times**, Elvis Mitchell (70/100, inferred): The critic finds the film visually dazzling with its bold use of color and anachronistic pop songs but notes that the narrative feels simultaneously stirring and dispiriting. It praises the emotional excess and heart that explodes in every scene. [Read](https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/18/movies/film-review-an-eyeful-an-earful-anachronism-lautrec-meets-lady-marmalade.html)
- **Slant Magazine**, Ed Gonzalez (2/4): The film is seen as a flashy, artificial celebration of pop culture mashups that lacks emotional depth or heart. Its energetic set pieces and musical numbers are praised as exhilarating but ultimately soulless. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/moulin-rouge/)
- **IndieWire**, IndieWire (30/100, inferred): The critic finds the film an overwhelming sensory overload that fails to connect emotionally. The spectacle is criticized as spasmodic and drowning in its own excess. [Read](https://www.indiewire.com/criticism/culture/cannes-review-drowning-at-the-moulin-rouge-luhrmanns-spectacle-spasms-80975/)
- **The Independent**, Kim Newman (30/100, inferred): The critic argues that Moulin Rouge fails to revive the musical genre, as Luhrmann does not trust the material enough to deliver proper song-and-dance numbers that advance the story. The reviewer singles out the jittery direction and over-reliance on pop song remixes as major flaws. [Read](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/why-baz-isn-t-up-to-the-job-9140064.html)
- **Empire**, Liz Moody: The review praises the film as a quirky, intoxicating arthouse musical that successfully builds on Luhrmann's previous work with a gaudy, opulent spectacle full of energy and romance. It singles out the real chemistry between Kidman and McGregor and the clever use of revamped pop songs as highlights. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/moulin-rouge-review/)
- **Screen Daily**: The critic hails Luhrmann as a visionary who reinvents genres with audacious innovation and expressionism, praising the splendid cast led by a dazzling Kidman and McGregor who excel in both acting and singing. [Read](https://www.screendaily.com/luhrmanns-sensory-overload/405696.article)
- **Sight and Sound**, Jos Arroyo: The critic finds the film a stretched trailer that overwhelms with cleverness and postmodern pastiche, turning a simple melodrama into something wearisome despite its visual beauty and ambitious references. [Read](http://old.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/2000)
- **The Guardian**, Peter Bradshaw: The critic describes the film as a wildly over-the-top fantasy Paris that is gorgeously and intricately conceived but ultimately too fast and furious, with constant gimmicks, crash zooms, and an excess of anachronistic pop songs that prevent the audience from drawing breath or appreciating the design. [Read](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2001/sep/07/nicolekidman)
- **Time Out**, GA: The critic praises the hyperkinetic, luridly stunning post-modern mix of myth, musical and pastiche with enormous gusto and visual ambition, though noting it lacks emotional punch and can drag. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/moulin-rouge-1)
- **Eye for Film**, Angus Wolfe Murray (85/100, inferred): The critic celebrates the film's transportive visual spectacle and operatic emotional intensity in Baz Luhrmann's reimagining of the Moulin Rouge story. They particularly praise the vibrant choreography and the charismatic performances of Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/moulin-rouge-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray)

## Details

- **Director:** Baz Luhrmann
- **Director:** Baz Luhrmann
- **Writer:** Baz Luhrmann, Craig Pearce
- **Cinematography:** Donald McAlpine
- **Editor:** Jill Bilcock
- **Music:** Craig Armstrong
- **Production design:** Catherine Martin
- **Costume design:** Catherine Martin, Angus Strathie
- **Producer:** Fred Baron, Martin Brown, Baz Luhrmann
- **Cast:** Ewan McGregor as Christian; Nicole Kidman as Satine; John Leguizamo as Toulouse-Lautrec; Jim Broadbent as Harold Zidler; Richard Roxburgh as The Duke; Garry McDonald as The Doctor; Jacek Koman as The Unconscious Argentinean; Matthew Whittet as Satie
- **Runtime:** 2h 08m
- **Certificate (MPA):** PG-13
- **Release (the US):** 1 June 2001
- **Genres:** Drama, Romance, Music
- **Also in:** [Best Picture winners](https://film.one/collections/oscar-best-picture.md) (Nominee, 2001); [BAFTA Best Film winners](https://film.one/collections/bafta-best-film.md) (Nominee, 2001); [Golden Globe Best Musical or Comedy winners](https://film.one/collections/golden-globe-comedy.md) (Winner, 2001)
- **Budget:** $52 million
- **Box office:** $179 million
- **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PpgPxjzbkA

## Where to watch in the US

- Amazon Prime Video: rent $3.99, hd
- Amazon Prime Video: buy $14.99, hd

*Checked 2026-09-14.*

Also available in: AR, AT, AU, BE, BG, BR, CA, CH, CL, CO, CZ, DE, DK, EC, EE, ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HK, HR, HU, IE, IS, IT, JP, KR, LT, MX, NL, NO, NZ, PA, PE, PL, PT, RO, RS, SE, SG, SI, TR, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country.

## Awards

- Academy Awards 2002: Best Actress (nominated); Best Cinematography (nominated); Best Film Editing (nominated); Best Makeup and Hairstyling (nominated); Best Picture (nominated); Best Sound (nominated); Best Costume Design (won); Best Production Design (won)
- AACTA Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role 2001: AACTA Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role (nominated)
- AACTA Award for Best Actor in a Supporting Role 2001: AACTA Award for Best Actor in a Supporting Role (nominated)
- AACTA Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role 2001: AACTA Award for Best Actress in a Leading Role (nominated)
- AACTA Award for Best Cinematography 2001: AACTA Award for Best Cinematography (won)
- AACTA Award for Best Costume Design 2001: AACTA Award for Best Costume Design (won)
- AACTA Award for Best Direction 2001: AACTA Award for Best Direction (nominated)
- AACTA Award for Best Editing 2001: AACTA Award for Best Editing (won)
- AACTA Award for Best Film 2001: AACTA Award for Best Film (nominated)
- AACTA Award for Best Production Design 2001: AACTA Award for Best Production Design (won)
- AACTA Award for Best Sound 2001: AACTA Award for Best Sound (won)
- European Film Award for Best Non-European Film 2001: European Film Award for Best Non-European Film (won)
- Golden Globes 2001: Best Original Score (won)

## If you liked this

- *The Umbrellas of Cherbourg* (1964), Fi1m 88: For lovers whose feelings become more convincing once ordinary conversation gives way. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-umbrellas-of-cherbourg.md)
- *Cabaret* (1972), Fi1m 88: Another theatrical romance, with sharper politics and considerably less faith in love. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/cabaret.md)
- *The Red Shoes* (1948), Fi1m 92: For colour, theatrical obsession and dancing given the space to hold us. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-red-shoes.md)
- *Devdas* (2002): A similarly extravagant romance that gives longing ample room to become unreasonable.
- *Strictly Ballroom* (1992), Fi1m 83: Luhrmann brings his taste for excess to competitive dancing, with welcome humour. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/strictly-ballroom.md)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/moulin-rouge