Split flap display showing large white digits five and fifty nine
Film review

Groundhog Day

1993 · Directed by Harold Ramis · 1h 41m · MPA PG

In a sentenceBill Murray makes being asked to be pleasant look like a serious breach of his employment contract

Phil Connors (Bill Murray) is a cynical weatherman who finds himself living the same day repeatedly. The people around him include Rita Hanson (Andie MacDowell), Larry (Chris Elliott) and Ned Ryerson (Stephen Tobolowsky), whose company Phil must face again and again. With familiar situations returning and no ordinary way forward, he has to work out what to do with a day that keeps coming back. Harold Ramis directs this fantasy comedy and romance, from a screenplay he writes with Danny Rubin.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Bill Murray makes repeated irritation remarkably funny in Harold Ramis’s warm, sharp comedy about being stuck with yourself. The romance gives Andie MacDowell too little room, but the jokes and the patience with Phil’s bad behaviour earn our recommendation.

Harold Ramis’s Groundhog Day takes a premise that could have produced a short sketch and finds enough in it for a rich, funny 101 minutes. We recommend it for Bill Murray’s sourness as much as for its warmth. Phil Connors, a cynical weatherman, has to live the same day repeatedly, which puts severe pressure on his belief that everybody else is the problem. Ramis and co-writer Danny Rubin understand the comic value of making such a man endure other people’s company.

The screenplay is curious about what Phil can do within that situation, and trusts us to follow without an elaborate explanation of the loop. Repetition gives the jokes a useful second chance: once we recognise a situation, Murray can change our response with a different degree of irritation. Pembroke J. Herring’s editing is crucial here. Familiarity needs enough time to register, but not so much that we begin anticipating every beat, and the cutting usually gets that balance right.

Murray makes contempt look almost reasonable, which is where the film gets its bite. Stephen Tobolowsky’s Ned Ryerson is particularly useful company: his comic persistence gives Murray something firm to push against. We laughed at Murray’s impatience, then felt slightly ashamed of recognising it. He makes the effort of listening to another person look like an unreasonable demand, and Ramis lets that ugliness remain visible beneath the joke. Tobolowsky has his own comic rhythm; he does not merely wait for the star’s response.

John Bailey’s cinematography is sensibly interested in Murray’s face. A small change of expression can alter a repeated encounter, and the images leave us room to catch it. David Nichols’s production design gives the familiar surroundings a useful ordinariness; Phil cannot blame his contempt on some grotesquely exaggerated setting. These contributions suit Ramis’s restrained direction, keeping the fantasy close to an everyday social embarrassment. The joke remains readable without the film having to make a spectacle of the loop.

The romance is less evenly written. Andie MacDowell’s Rita Hanson gives Phil a credible reason to look beyond himself, and MacDowell’s directness is a good answer to Murray’s evasions. But Rubin and Ramis give us much more reason to wonder about Phil than about Rita; she can feel like someone the screenplay approves of before it has properly introduced her. George Fenton’s music occasionally adds more sweetness than these performances need. The film is already quite capable of making a small shift in Phil’s manner count.

Fantasy comedies often hurry through the possibilities of their central idea so they can get on with a familiar lesson. This one spends time on the awkward business of being Phil, and that makes its interest in better behaviour persuasive. There are changes of tone that sit a little awkwardly together, but the film is willing to let a joke become uncomfortable without immediately reassuring us. It does not treat being pleasant as something that comes naturally to everyone. Watch it with someone who has had to put up with your bad moods.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

87
Positive
8
Mixed
0
Negative
0

The consensus is firmly positive, with praise centred on Bill Murray’s deadpan timing and the warmth he brings to a cynical character. Most critics credit Harold Ramis’s restrained direction with keeping the time-loop premise inventive rather than repetitive. The script earns admiration for finding both comic possibilities and philosophical substance in its central idea, while several reviews also value the supporting performances. Murray’s resistance to easy sweetness is a recurring explanation for why the romance and sentiment work.

The differences concern the degree of enthusiasm rather than any fundamental rejection of the film. Variety offers the clearest reservations, finding that the premise takes time to click and noting uneven tone and dry patches, though it still welcomes the warmth of the payoff. Elsewhere, the reviews differ over emphasis: some celebrate a comedy of ideas, while others respond chiefly to its gentleness and optimism.

Radio Times
★★★★★ · David Parkinson
100

The review hails it as a contender for the best comedy of the 1990s, highlighting Bill Murray's career-best performance as the trapped weatherman and Ramis's inventive direction that keeps the one-gag concept fresh. Supporting turns by Tobolowsky and MacDowell are also singled out for praise.

Read the full review →
Time Out
★★★★★ · GA
100

The critic praises the script's rigorous exploration of every nuance of the time-loop premise and its mix of gags with philosophical depth. Ramis directs with a light touch that allows Murray's performance to shine in this comedy of ideas.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Caroline Westbrook
90*

Groundhog Day is one of the finest comedies of the 1990s, remaining fresh, funny and original after repeated viewings. Bill Murray delivers a career-best performance and director Harold Ramis avoids sentimentality in favour of hysterical set-pieces while offering no complex explanation for the time-loop premise.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
12 February 1993 · Kenneth Turan
85*

The critic finds it the most endearing film from Murray and Ramis, a sweet surprise that uses the star's comic hostility to make sentimentality palatable in a gentle, small-scale effort.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
14 March 1993 · Caryn James
80*

The critic calls the film one of the season's most entertaining, crediting Bill Murray's likable cynicism for making the time-loop romance and social absurdity work as a major hit.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
12 February 1993 · ★★★/4 · Roger Ebert
75

The critic praises the film's lovable and sweet take on self-redemption through a time-loop premise, highlighting its optimistic view of human nature and originality over formulaic comedy.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Groundhog Day worth watching?
Groundhog Day is worth watching for anyone who enjoys a comedy that lets its lead stay unpleasant for longer than is comfortable, and we scored it 88. Bill Murray's irritation carries the film, and Harold Ramis finds enough in the repeated day for a full 101 minutes. The romance gives Andie MacDowell too little room, which is our main reservation.
How long is Groundhog Day, and what is it rated?
Groundhog Day runs 1h 41m and is rated PG by the MPA in the US. It is a romance and fantasy film.
Where can I watch Groundhog Day in the US?
Groundhog Day is streaming on Amazon Prime Video in the US, and it is also available to rent from Amazon Prime Video from $3.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How does Groundhog Day compare to The Apartment?
Groundhog Day and The Apartment are both comedies about decent behaviour being hard work, but Harold Ramis's film is the lighter and the more consistently funny of the two. Billy Wilder's is sadder and more patient with its unhappy people, and its second half runs longer than it needs. Choose Murray for laughs with some discomfort underneath; choose Wilder if you want the discomfort to matter more.
What should I watch after Groundhog Day?
After Groundhog Day, try The Apartment (1960, Fi1m 91): For another comedy that makes decent behaviour difficult without making it look foolish. Then A Matter of Life and Death (1946, Fi1m 92): Romance and an impossible predicament, handled with wit and an unexpectedly practical eye; and After Life (1998, Fi1m 85): A quieter fantasy that gives ordinary memories the attention usually reserved for miracles.

Cast

Awards

Hugo Awards, 1994

Nominated
Best Dramatic Presentation

MTV Movie Award for Best Comedic Performance, 1993

Nominated
MTV Movie Award for Best Comedic Performance

Saturn Awards, 1993

Nominated
Best Costume

If you liked this, try…

  1. The Apartment (1960, Fi1m 91)For another comedy that makes decent behaviour difficult without making it look foolish.

  2. A Matter of Life and Death (1946, Fi1m 92)Romance and an impossible predicament, handled with wit and an unexpectedly practical eye.

  3. After Life (1998, Fi1m 85)A quieter fantasy that gives ordinary memories the attention usually reserved for miracles.

  4. Palm Springs (2020, Fi1m 78)A more unruly time-loop romance, with similarly little patience for its protagonists’ excuses.

  5. The Truman Show (1998, Fi1m 88)Another comic performance made uneasy by a life organised around an impossible situation.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever