Critics’ reviews

The Italian Job (2003)

11 reviews from 11 publications. Critics’ score 57: 1 positive, 7 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of The Italian Job

57
Positive
1
Mixed
7
Negative
3

The reviews lean mixed, with praise concentrated on the caper mechanics, comic ensemble work and Mini chases. Several critics find the remake brisk and enjoyable, crediting its tighter construction and energetic direction even when they doubt its personality. The final heist supplies the chief pleasures for some, while Charlize Theron’s screen presence earns approval even among detractors. The recurring reservation is that competent entertainment does not give this version enough distinctive character.

The spread is wide, though enthusiasm is scarce. Variety is the clear enthusiast, finding a witty, confident remake that improves on the original, despite a flat conclusion. Eye for Film takes the opposite view, judging it formulaic, implausible and markedly inferior. The New Yorker occupies a more revealing middle ground in its comments: the chases entertain, but Mark Wahlberg’s subdued performance weakens the rivalry. Critics also divide over the finale, which some find lively and others lifeless.

Variety
26 May 2003 · Robert Koehler
85*

Koehler finds the remake a confident, witty caper that outdoes the original and stands out among summer action films. He praises its charismatic ensemble and smoothly executed heist, though he finds the conclusion flat.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Chris Hewitt
65*

The remake is entertaining but lacks the original’s defining moments and Ocean’s Eleven’s pizzazz. The critic especially praises the gang’s comic performances and the climactic Mini chase.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
4 June 2003 · Agnes Poirier
64*

The page identifies this as a review, but its verdict is unavailable in the accessible text. No specific praise or complaint can be determined from the page shown.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
30 May 2003 · A. O. Scott
64*

The page content was inaccessible, so the critic’s verdict and specific praise or complaint cannot be verified. No review summary can be provided without guessing.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· DA
64*

The available metadata identifies this as a review of the 2003 film. It notes the remake’s shift from Turin to Los Angeles and its predominantly American cast, but the critic’s verdict and specific praise or complaints are unavailable.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · Jason Caro
60

Caro finds the remake an enjoyable ride despite the risks of adapting the much-loved original. He praises its supercharged direction, bright cast and smarter-than-expected script.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
21 September 2003 · Philip French
60*

French finds the remake tauter and better made, but too lacking in distinctive character to become a cult film. He praises its tighter construction while faulting its insufficient idiosyncrasy.

Read the full review →
Total Film
19 September 2003 · ★★★ · Total Film
60

The critic finds it enjoyable smash-and-grab entertainment, though it never quite reaches top gear. The zinging final heist and its colour-coded Minis provide the biggest thrills.

Read the full review →
Slant Magazine
28 May 2003 · ★½/4 · Nick Schager
38

Schager gives the remake a sharply negative review, calling it tedious and unimaginative. He singles out Charlize Theron’s screen presence as a bright spot amid the dull performances and lifeless finale.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
8 June 2003 · David Denby
35*

Denby finds the film entertaining and technically capable, but ultimately emotionally dead. He praises the energetic car chases while faulting Mark Wahlberg’s subdued performance for draining the central rivalry of tension.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
18 September 2003 · Angus Wolfe Murray
20*

The critic finds the remake formulaic, implausible and far inferior to the original. Charlize Theron is the standout, praised for her presence and apparent belief in the role.

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