Critics’ reviews

South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut (1999)

13 reviews from 13 publications. Critics’ score 76: 12 positive, 1 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut

76
Positive
12
Mixed
1
Negative
0

Most critics like it, and the praise clusters in two places: the satire and the songs. The reviews agree the targets are well chosen, chiefly the ratings board, censorship hysteria and the habit of blaming films and television for what parents fail to do, and that the swearing has a point. Nearly every critic singles out the musical numbers, which parody Broadway and Disney, and several note that the feature is more tightly built than the television episodes.

The reservations are about stamina. Several critics, among them The Guardian, Time Out and Empire, find the film sharpest in its first hour and stretched after that, with subplots that run on. The spread is narrow, most scores sitting between the seventies and nineties; the one mixed review comes from Roger Ebert, who grants the laughs but finds the film both offensive and out of steam by the end.

Sight and Sound
· Leslie Felperin
90*

The critic praises the film's timely satire of US censorship hysteria, politicians, media and xenophobia, noting its taut structure compared to the TV series. They single out the musical numbers and overall comedic execution as a high point.

Read the full review →
The Independent
6 July 1999
90*

The critic hails the film as a radical, insolent and breathtakingly offensive speedboat of a movie that mocks the R rating system and questions what constitutes a 'kid' film. They single out its satirical handling of profanity, adult hypocrisy and the US-Canada 'war' plot as making it the most truly radical American movie in years.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
30 June 1999 · Stephen Holden
90*

The review calls the film very funny and extremely obscene, praising its anti-Disney musical numbers that skewer everything from Rodgers and Hammerstein to inspirational ballads while making a pointed statement about ratings hypocrisy.

Read the full review →
The Times
26 October 2002 · Stephen Dalton
90*

The critic calls the film an inspired Oscar-nominated version that pushes Parker and Stone's talents to sublime new heights. They single out its scabrously funny mockery of puritanical pundits who equate vulgar language with immorality, recommending it highly to fans and non-converts alike.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Caroline Westbrook
70*

The critic finds the film surprisingly agreeable and fun in its feature-length form, praising its choice comic moments, satirical sideswipes at censorship and parental control, and perky musical numbers. However, it suffers from hit-and-miss quality with some subplots dragged out too long.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
30 June 1999 · John Anderson
70*

The critic describes the film as gleefully vulgar and eagerly offensive yet smart and timely in its satire of intolerance, the ratings system and cultural sanctimony. He singles out the torrent of vulgarity and the V-chip subplot for their pointed humor.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
27 August 1999 · Andrew Pulver
70*

The film is the most impressively vicious and nasty-minded film satire of the year, capitalising on its freedom from broadcast censorship with a flood of obscenities and self-referential story ideas. The central message about blaming cultural products for societal ills shines through, though the film shows signs of strain after the first hour.

Read the full review →
Time Out
13 March 2014 · TCh
70*

The film delivers a sharp, outrageous satirical assault on censorship and other targets in its first half, but struggles to maintain momentum over its full runtime.

Read the full review →
Variety
28 June 1999 · Dennis Harvey
70*

The review finds the film delivers with considerable aplomb and clever diversion despite its juvenile content, highlighting the expanded musical interludes and satirical jabs at celebrities, the ratings board and xenophobia as particularly inspired.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
30 June 1999 · Roger Ebert
50*

The critic finds the film a vicious social satire on obscenity, ratings hypocrisy and politics that delivers shocking laughs but also offends and runs out of steam. He singles out the bedroom scenes between Satan and Saddam Hussein for their audacity.

Read the full review →
Collider
22 October 2009 · Andre Dellamorte
80*

The film is funny and surprisingly well structured, holding up better than most episodes from its era. The critic singles out the craft of the musical parody, particularly the overlapping songs in the West Side Story homage.

Read the full review →
Eye for Film
19 January 2001 · Angus Wolfe Murray
80*

The critic praises Trey Parker's sharp, politically incorrect satire that twists institutional humbug and delivers wicked one-liners while making adults look foolish. The songs and deceptively simple animation are highlighted as standout elements that outdo The Simpsons in irreverence.

Read the full review →
Consequence
29 June 2019
75*

The film captures American culture's tendency to blame external scapegoats for complex problems rather than looking inward. The critic praises its satirical escalation of moral panics into absurdity while highlighting the enduring relevance of its message about personal responsibility.

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