Critics’ reviews

Pacific Rim (2013)

17 reviews from 17 publications. Critics’ score 63: 8 positive, 5 mixed, 4 negative.

Back to our review of Pacific Rim

63
Positive
8
Mixed
5
Negative
4

Most critics come away entertained, if not converted. The praise settles on Guillermo del Toro himself: his affection for kaiju and giant-robot pictures, the detail of the creature and machine designs, and the lived-in production design around them. The fights are the other point of agreement, admired for their scale and for being cut so that the eye can follow what is happening, a courtesy several reviewers note is rare in this kind of film. The warmer reviews call it a sincere blockbuster rather than a cynical one.

The reservations are near-unanimous even among admirers: the humans are thinly written, the comedy flat, the script functional at best. From there the spread is wide. The Guardian misses del Toro’s usual visual personality, Time Out finds the film cold and repetitive, and The Wrap complains the monsters are hard to see through all the rain and night. Variety goes furthest, calling it the squarest and loudest of the director’s films.

Los Angeles Times
10 July 2013 · Kenneth Turan
90*

Del Toro's visionary imagination, detailed world-building, and spectacular visuals make this a worthy, magical return for the director after years away.

Read the full review →
The Telegraph
8 July 2013 · Robbie Collin
85*

The critic praises the film as a bold, exhaustive and utterly convincing definition of fun, with del Toro flooding the project with affection and artistry so that it enchants rather than merely nostalgically recalls childhood cartoons.

Read the full review →
Little White Lies
11 July 2013 · 3/4/4 · David Jenkins
80

The critic hails the film as a model blockbuster full of rich, romantic and sincere design that pays homage to classic monster movies while showing up cynical destructo-porn. It singles out the graceful, majestic action sequences and visual treats for particular praise.

Read the full review →
Total Film
10 July 2013 · Matthew Leyland
75*

A warmer Transformers-style blockbuster steeped in affection and sincerity, with strong creature designs and likeable humans, despite some murky action sequences.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
7 July 2013 · Todd McCarthy
70*

The critic calls it a better-than-average humans-vs.-monsters spectacular with first-class effects, coherent action, and lively direction that avoids bloating or padding. It singles out the strong forward momentum and fun surprises amid the formulaic elements.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
11 July 2013 · A.O. Scott
70*

The film is formulaic and lacks subtlety or novelty, but succeeds as energetic, fun spectacle with appealing giant-robot-vs-monster action and genre enthusiasm.

Read the full review →
Empire
10 May 2011 · Ian Nathan
65*

The critic finds it a big, brash B-movie that delivers on robots punching monsters but notes the humans are thinly drawn and the action geography hard to follow.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
12 July 2013 · Kim Newman
65*

The critic praises the breathtaking action sequences and del Toro's fanboy attention to kaiju design and homages, but faults the film for lacking ambition with cardboard human characters and a gung-ho militaristic tone.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
7 August 2013
60*

Sci-fi fans will enjoy the mechanical monster mash-up and del Toro's fanboy enthusiasm, but the murky fights and weak human drama will turn others off.

Read the full review →
Time Out
8 July 2013 · ★★★ · Tom Huddleston
60

The critic finds the thunderous, detailed action set-pieces superb and a bang-up job for its target audience of 12-year-old boys, but complains that the film feels inhuman, repetitive and lacks del Toro's signature warmth and idiosyncrasy.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
11 July 2013 · Peter Bradshaw
55*

The critic finds the film has a great premise of monsters versus robots but is hampered by thin characters, laugh-free comedy and little of del Toro's usual visual flair. The effects are ambitious but the overall result lacks personality and fails to transform the summer blockbuster genre.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
8 July 2013 · Ed Gonzalez
40*

The critic finds the film an overstuffed but intriguing vision that stages battles like a multi-level video game, lacking emotional intimacy and poignancy despite elegant craft in effects and some personal touches. It singles out the Hong Kong sequence and the scientist character's ambition for praise while faulting the shallow human relationships.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
22 July 2013 · Anthony Lane
30*

The script and characters are weak, but the massive monster-robot fights deliver the main appeal in a loud, business-oriented summer spectacle.

Read the full review →
Variety
7 July 2013 · Justin Chang
30*

It is the squarest, clunkiest, and loudest of del Toro's films—entertaining for fans of noise and chaos but lacking real engagement, wonder, or suspense.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
10 July 2013 · Max Crawford
90*

The critic praises the film as delivering exactly what fans of giant-robot vs. monster movies want, with astonishing battle scenes that avoid shaky-cam editing and give the jaegers real personality and physical presence.

Read the full review →
Den of Geek
8 July 2013 · ★★★★ · Ryan Lambie
80

The critic highlights Guillermo del Toro's visual imagination and infectious enthusiasm for kaiju and mecha genres, praising the spectacular robot-monster fights, lived-in production design, and bright eccentric atmosphere as a refreshing summer spectacle. It notes the film rushes through some character and story elements like the Drift concept and Mako's backstory, lacking depth and subtlety overall.

Read the full review →
The Wrap
8 July 2013 · Alonso Duralde
40*

The critic finds the film disappointing because the monsters and robots are hard to see clearly due to dark, rainy, night scenes, and the human elements and performances are weak. It offers some laughs and thrills but overall feels meager.

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