--- title: "Underground: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/underground/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/underground" critics_score: 71 critics_reviews: 10 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." --- # Underground (1995): what the critics said Critics' score 71 from 10 reviews: 6 positive, 2 mixed, 2 negative. Most critics like Underground, and the praise gathers around the same things: the scale and energy of Kusturica’s staging, the circus-like set-pieces, and the way lowbrow slapstick sits beside an allegory about Yugoslavia’s political self-deception. Several describe it as sprawling and feverish, a comedy with real pain underneath, and more than one singles out the final sequence as the point where the humour and the sorrow finally meet. The reservations cluster around length and purpose. Even admirers concede that three hours leave the viewer worn out, and the sceptics go further. Empire finds it rambling and increasingly hard to follow after a strong opening, Time Out cannot work out what the allegory is for, and The Independent calls it wilful and short on feeling for its people. The spread is wide, from wholehearted enthusiasm to outright irritation, and the sharpest dissent comes largely from the British press. ## Los Angeles Times Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 30 January 1998. The critic finds it a sprawling, rowdy, vital film laced with outrageous absurdist dark humor and unspeakable pain, a dazzling epic allegory that sustains passion and sorrow across decades of Yugoslavian history. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-jan-30-ca-13528-story.html) ## Slant Magazine — Ed Gonzalez Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 21 December 2003. The critic hails the film as the most important of the last 25 years and a sweltering, morally inquisitive work of political fiction that laments humanity’s propensity for self-destruction. He singles out its deliriously metaphorical blend of lowbrow slapstick, sophisticated war commentary, and magical realist elements for particular praise. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/underground/) ## The New York Times — Janet Maslin Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 20 June 1997. The critic describes a wild, sprawling feverish whimsical allegory with a devastating central idea about political delusion and the fate of Yugoslavia, praising its robust tale, bursts of humor, and magnificent ending that melds tragedy with optimism. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/library/film/underground-film-review.html) ## The Times — Kate Muir Rating ★★★★☆. 25 March 2016. The critic hails Kusturica’s film as his masterpiece, a hallucinogenic comic romp through Yugoslavia’s troubled history. She singles out its surreal, circus-like portrayal of the repetitive insanity of conflict for particular note. [Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/life-style/wildlife-nature/article/classic-film-of-the-week-underground-1995-cor-cw30d8970) ## Variety — Deborah Young Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 30 May 1995. Festival review. The critic calls it a three-hour steamroller circus that leaves the viewer dazed and exhausted but mightily impressed, with energy and a condemnation of communism and war making it emotionally engaging at Cannes. [Read the review](https://variety.com/1995/film/reviews/underground-3-1200441539/) ## The AV Club — Joshua Klein Fi1m's normalised score 60/100 (inferred from the text). 29 March 2002. The critic calls the film a bizarre, often repellent anti-war parable that takes too long to state the obvious but hits scattered high notes along the way. He singles out the surreal atmosphere and Lubitsch-like black comedy subplots for praise while criticizing the shrill tone, annoying characters, and excessive length. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/underground-1798194771) ## The Independent — Adam Mars-Jones Fi1m's normalised score 55/100 (inferred from the text). 7 March 1996. The critic finds the film no masterpiece, too wilful and ramshackle with little feeling for its people, but notes Kusturica's striking imagery and lyricism in the final sequence that evokes Tarkovsky. [Read the review](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/vision-improbable-1340688.html) ## Empire — William Thomas Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. The review calls the film rambling and over-ambitious, with events engaging early on but becoming inaccessible and confusing afterward, stronger on style than substance. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/underground-review/) ## Time Out — GA Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 10 September 2012. The critic praises Kusturica's technical virtuosity in staging hectic large-scale set-pieces but finds it hard to discern the exact purpose of this epic allegory about political deception and heroism. They suggest that behind the sensational imagery there is ultimately less substance than meets the eye. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/underground-2) ## Collider — Namwene Mukabwa Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 3 August 2024. The critic hails Emir Kusturica's 1995 film as a genre-defying masterpiece that blends war, comedy, fantasy, and romance into a chaotic yet beautiful cinematic experience. They praise its purposeful direction, surreal humor, and ability to find beauty in chaos while challenging conventional storytelling. [Read the review](https://collider.com/underground-1995-movie/) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/underground.md