Critics’ reviews

Raising Arizona (1987)

11 reviews from 11 publications. Critics’ score 64: 7 positive, 1 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of Raising Arizona

64
Positive
7
Mixed
1
Negative
3
Empire
1 January 2000 · Mark Dinning
90*

The critic calls it a wonderfully surreal, hilarious joy that mixes multiple genres including prison movie, screwball comedy and Spaghetti Western while delivering frantic fun and timeless chases. They single out the sublime dialogue, Carter Burwell's score and Barry Sonnenfeld's cinematography for praise.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · GA
85*

The Coen brothers deliver a fervently inventive comedy that confounds expectations after Blood Simple. Its fresh and funny quality stems from the sheer fertility of the writing and the splendidly seedy depiction of a mythical Arizona populated by memorable no-hopers.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · John Ferguson
80

This delirious mix of slapstick, surrealism and sentimentality remains one of the Coens' warmest, most complete works. The dazzling invention of the brothers shines through from the audacious pre-credits sequence, with superb performances from Cage and Hunter.

Read the full review →
Vulture
20 October 2010 · Alden Ford
80*

The critic enjoyed the film as a quirky, loud and colorful early Coen comedy that holds up well due to strong characters, writing, cast and filmmaking. It succeeds on its own terms as an energetic piece showcasing the directors' potential.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
13 April 1987 · Pauline Kael
70*

The film is a broad, cornpone-surreal burlesque about baby love and family aspirations, with a galumphing tempo and sight gags. It has rambunctious charm thanks to the Coens' mechanical camera work and Nicolas Cage's winning slapstick performance.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
11 March 1987 · Vincent Canby
70*

The Coen brothers' second feature is a comedy about a recidivist convenience-store robber who falls for a police photographer and steals a quintuplet to start a family. It is praised for its neo-Hitchcockian style and the leads' performances.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1986 · Variety Staff
50*

The Coen brothers deliver a twisted, quirky view of family rearing full of off-the-wall humor and surreal everyday life. While it has splendid touches and yocks, the loosely structured story does not always hold together coherently.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
20 March 1987 · Sheila Benson
30*

The Coens' jangling breakneck farce about trailer-dwellers who steal a baby is technically adept but relentlessly boring and condescending toward its characters. It manipulates cartoonish figures without cherishing them as fellow humans.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
20 March 1987 · Roger Ebert
30*

The critic finds the film marred by overly mannered dialogue and a lack of velocity, despite a good premise and talented cast; he praises the charming moments with the child and the fun with the Arizona character but criticizes the uneven tone and subplots.

Read the full review →
The Wrap
10 March 2017
90*

The piece celebrates the film as a cult classic that has stood the test of time despite initial mixed reviews and poor box office. It singles out the film's distinctive character names, heartfelt story of family and second chances, and its mix of hilarity and emotion as standout elements, calling it a masterpiece.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
1 August 2001 · Gator Macready
30*

The critic finds the film ludicrous and lacking any serviceable plot or developed characters beyond stereotypes, with a narrative that is too random and free-spirited to succeed as comedy or any genre. A couple of bizarre moments, such as the jailbreak scene and one involving a grenade, provide minor amusement amid the overall mess.

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