The reviews split almost down the middle, and the split runs partly along lines of time. Most critics writing in 1994 are impressed: Oliver Stone’s film is taken as an audacious and relevant satire of a culture that turns murderers into celebrities and a media that profits from them. Even its detractors concede the craft. Praise clusters on Stone’s visual assault, the editing across film stocks and Robert Richardson’s cinematography, with Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis singled out among the performances.
Reservations cluster on the satire itself, which several critics find obvious and heavy-handed and, with distance, dated, and on a plot they call thin and dialogue they call clichéd. The spread is wide. The New Yorker dissents from the 1994 enthusiasm, finding the film glib and oddly undisturbing for its subject, while The Guardian, revisiting it in 2024, judges it close to unwatchable. Later critics at Slant and Collider disagree, arguing the style alone keeps it fascinating.
