Critics’ reviews

GoldenEye (1995)

13 reviews from 13 publications. Critics’ score 71: 9 positive, 4 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of GoldenEye

71
Positive
9
Mixed
4
Negative
0

Most critics welcome GoldenEye as a confident relaunch after the series’ gap, and the praise clusters on the action. The opening bungee jump and the tank chase through St Petersburg are singled out, and Martin Campbell is credited with keeping the pace brisk and the set pieces coherent. Pierce Brosnan is judged a solid fit, though a few find him less assured in quieter scenes. Judi Dench’s M and Famke Janssen’s Xenia Onatopp draw consistent notice, and several reviews approve of the film’s willingness to poke at Bond’s chauvinism for a post-Cold War audience.

The reservations concern originality. Several critics find it a competent run through the formula rather than a fresh one, and the spread is wide. The dissent comes largely from the American press of 1995: The New York Times misses the Cold War backdrop and finds the dialogue flat, while The New Yorker judges it mindless beneath the irony. Reviews from years later tend to be warmer.

Empire
1 January 2000 · Kim Newman
90*

The film is a confident return to classic Bond form after the series' 1980s struggles, packed with stunts, chases, and action sequences. It singles out Famke Janssen's Xenia Onatopp as the standout element and calls it the best Bond movie since On Her Majesty's Secret Service.

Read the full review →
Variety
15 November 1995 · Todd McCarthy
90*

The critic declares Bond back in business with a dynamic action entry that breathes fresh life into the series through smart repositioning for the 90s. Brosnan makes a solid debut, the director keeps momentum high with coherence and energy, and the stunt work is terrific, especially the opening bungee jump.

Read the full review →
Little White Lies
17 November 2020 · Mark Allison
80*

The critic praises GoldenEye for successfully updating the Bond franchise with self-aware humor and more progressive sexual politics suited to a post-Cold War world. It singles out the film's handling of Bond's chauvinism, including M's memorable rebuke of him as a 'sexist misogynist dinosaur,' for helping refresh the character.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · Adrian Turner
80

The critic notes that M's description of Bond as a sexist, misogynist dinosaur rings true, yet praises Brosnan for establishing himself as the best Bond since Connery by emphasizing loyalty and patriotism. Highlights include Judi Dench's debut as M, Famke Janssen's memorable villain, and a standout tank chase in St Petersburg.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
15 November 1995 · David Hunter
75*

The critic praises the film's renewed vigor and top-drawer action sequences in this successful relaunch of the Bond series with Pierce Brosnan, while noting it gets bogged down in secondary characters and has disappointing villains.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
17 November 1995 · Roger Ebert
70*

The critic notes that the film follows the classic Bond formula with spectacular stunts but marks a shift as the first self-aware entry that acknowledges the absurdity of its hero. Brosnan’s Bond is portrayed as more sensitive and vulnerable than previous iterations, though the overall experience is entertaining without full engagement.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
2 October 2025
70*

The critic finds a fair bit to enjoy in this 1995 Bond film reissued for its 30th anniversary, praising its post-Soviet self-awareness, high-octane action and introduction of Judi Dench as M. It is described as best experienced on TV over Christmas, with some reservations about Pierce Brosnan in the role and the sketchy plot details.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · NKe
70*

The review observes that GoldenEye updates Bond for the post-Cold War era with new characters and moral dilemmas while retaining classic elements like Q and globe-threatening villains. It notes Brosnan excels in action but seems less assured in introspective scenes, with Campbell maintaining a brisk pace and evoking the style of earlier films.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
17 November 1995 · Kenneth Turan
55*

The critic finds GoldenEye an acceptable but unoriginal Bond entry that feels weary and like a reasonable facsimile of the formula. It singles out the strong pre-title sequence and Brosnan's self-confident swagger as highlights amid the familiar explosions and plot turns.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
17 November 1995 · Janet Maslin
50*

The review finds Brosnan’s Bond viable in a 90s style but criticizes the film for lacking the Cold War context and classic Bond theme, resulting in flat dialogue and a series that still suffers from the blahs. It praises the reliable action sequences supplied by director Martin Campbell without special flair.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
20 November 1995 · Anthony Lane
45*

The critic views GoldenEye as a schizophrenic film that both honors and trashes Bond traditions, ultimately feeling like a mindless exercise despite some ironic touches. It singles out the impressive pre-title bungee jump sequence for its sense of excess and excitement.

Read the full review →
Den of Geek
18 November 2019 · Max Williams
80*

The critic calls GoldenEye a mostly triumphant return for the franchise after a long hiatus, praising its brio, strong villain in Sean Bean’s Alec Trevelyan, and the entertaining action sequences despite some flaws like pacing issues in certain scenes.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
4 February 2009 · Stephen Carty
65*

The critic finds GoldenEye a decent, effective re-launch of the Bond series with fresh post-Cold War elements and self-aware moments, but notes it lacks enough originality to rank among the most memorable entries. Brosnan makes a charming Bond and the action sequences impress, though the film largely sticks to the familiar franchise formula.

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