--- title: "Wonder Boys: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/wonder-boys/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/wonder-boys" critics_score: 72 critics_reviews: 14 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." --- # Wonder Boys (2000): what the critics said Critics' score 72 from 14 reviews: 11 positive, 0 mixed, 3 negative. Most critics warm to Wonder Boys, and the praise gathers around Michael Douglas. Reviewers describe his stuck, shambling professor as one of his most appealing performances, and several call the ensemble around him flawless or generous. Steve Kloves’s adaptation of Chabon’s novel draws steady credit for wit and literary jokes, and Hanson’s direction is called warm, fastidious and understated. The recurring word is charm: a screwball campus comedy that likes its losers and never turns sentimental. The dissent is sharp rather than spread out. There are no mixed reviews; critics either enjoy it or find it a dud. The New York Times thinks Hanson smothers the screwball energy and leaves the film slow and muffled. Sight and Sound finds too many strands packed in and most characters underdeveloped. Film Stories, writing much later, calls it inert and its hero hard to root for. Even an admirer at Eye for Film thinks the ending a cop-out. ## Empire — Colin Kennedy Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. The critic calls it a great movie and minor masterpiece that feels both timeless and contemporary. He singles out the witty screenplay unafraid of slapstick and the heart-felt drama devoid of sentiment, along with the generous ensemble performances. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/wonder-boys-review/) ## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 12 May 2000. Ebert praises the film as an accurate and accomplished portrayal of campus life and midlife crisis, highlighting its character-driven story and Michael Douglas's nuanced performance as a stuck professor. He singles out the European-style preference for character over plot and the focus on trying to be a good teacher. [Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/wonder-boys-2000) ## Variety — Emanuel Levy Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 17 February 2000. Levy hails the film as a superbly mounted screwball comedy with a delectably original reworking of the coming-of-age genre, praising its witty sophistication and flawless ensemble performances led by Michael Douglas. He singles out the tremendous charm from impeccable timing, right tone, and the gallantry of defeat in its loser characters. [Read the review](https://variety.com/2000/film/reviews/wonder-boys-2-1117778702/) ## Slant Magazine — Ed Gonzalez Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 2 May 2001. Hanson’s remarkably warm and understated film explores academic life and the bonds that build between emotionally frustrated men over chaotic events. The overall effect is like opening a present on Christmas morning as the broken men overcome isolation and commit to each other and their work. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/wonder-boys/) ## The Guardian — Philip French Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 5 November 2000. The critic finds Wonder Boys a delightful and constantly surprising film that stands out from dumbed-down Hollywood with its literary references and jokes. He singles out the warmth felt towards the shambling protagonist Grady Tripp for praise. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2000/nov/05/philipfrench) ## Radio Times — Joanna Berry Rating 4/5. Hanson weaves the quirky, dark strands of the professor's chaotic life—including affair, pregnancy, stalled novel and odd student—into a mesmerising, often moving drama with fascinating characters and wicked humour. Strong performances from Douglas, Maguire, McDormand and the supporting cast stand out. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-w1dvi0/wonder-boys/) ## The AV Club — Chuck Bowen Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 31 May 2016. The critic praises Wonder Boys as an unusually shaggy prestige picture with absurdity and delicacy, highlighting its loyalty to the source material and its exploration of memory and creation. They single out the craftsmanship in direction and cinematography contrasted with playful pacing. [Read the review](https://www.avclub.com/sorry-revenge-of-the-nerds-but-this-is-the-premier-cam-1798247743) ## Los Angeles Times — Kenneth Turan Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 23 February 2000. Turan calls the film a pleasure for its generous spirit and sympathetic warmth toward flawed characters, crediting Hanson's fastidious direction and Kloves's adaptation of Chabon's novel. He singles out Michael Douglas's anchored performance as the once-formidable man gone to seed. [Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-feb-23-ca-1537-story.html) ## Time Out — TCh Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). Douglas delivers one of his most appealing performances as the befuddled professor, and the film entertainingly digresses through its campus discontents and collisions in a more comic mode than Hanson's prior work. Sophisticated dialogue and craftsmanship enhance the pleasure of the unusual confusion. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/wonder-boys) ## Sight and Sound — Charlotte O'Sullivan Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). The film packs too many elements into a frenetic hybrid of coming-of-age drama, in-jokes about success and road movie, leaving most characters underdeveloped. Maguire's unnerving performance as the precocious student stands out amid the broad strokes of Douglas' lead role. [Read the review](http://old.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/review/585) ## The New York Times — A. O. Scott Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 23 February 2000. Scott finds the film a dud despite its strong cast and source material, criticizing Hanson's direction for smothering the screwball energy and resulting in a slow, muffled tone. He singles out Robert Downey Jr.'s manic insouciance as the element that rescues it from complete dullness. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/23/movies/film-review-marijuana-manuscript-and-marriage-are-a-mess.html) ## Collider — Liam Gaughan Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 14 April 2024. Praises Michael Douglas's versatile and nuanced performance in this heartfelt dramedy, highlighting his balance of humor and serious themes; notes the film's critical acclaim but box office failure due to marketing. [Read the review](https://collider.com/michael-douglas-wonder-boys/) ## Eye for Film — Angus Wolfe Murray Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 19 January 2001. The critic praises Michael Douglas's performance as the once-lionized writer Grady Tripp and the clever, witty script by Steve Kloves. The film is singled out for its intelligent take on the dissolution of promise and creative passion, though the ending is called a cop-out. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/wonder-boys-film-review-by-angus-wolfe-murray) ## Film Stories — A J Black Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 31 March 2025. The critic finds the film disappointing overall, trapped in limbo and not living up to its potential despite solid direction and Douglas's performance; praises the source material's potential but notes the film's inertia and hard-to-root-for protagonist. [Read the review](https://filmstories.co.uk/features/wonder-boys-michael-douglas-shrugged-off-his-star-persona-for-a-little-seen-2000-drama) --- © 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/wonder-boys.md