Critics’ reviews

The Birdcage (1996)

9 reviews from 9 publications. Critics’ score 57: 5 positive, 1 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of The Birdcage

57
Positive
5
Mixed
1
Negative
3

Most critics lean favourably, though not by much. The praise clusters on the cast. Gene Hackman, as the conservative senator, is the one name nearly every review singles out, with Dianne Wiest beside him. Robin Williams is repeatedly credited for restraint, which several critics find a relief, and Elaine May’s screenplay draws praise for fresh dialogue and topical satire laid over the French original.

The reservations cluster on the remake itself. Several critics find the material shows its age and the drag comedy has a been-there quality, and the spread is wide, from warm to cold. Time Out argues the script ends up celebrating conformity rather than diversity, and finds Nathan Lane’s performance a test of patience, where others count him among the film’s strongest elements. The Independent goes furthest, calling it near humourless. Notably, all three negative notices date from the first release; the later reviews are kinder.

Variety
3 March 1996 · Todd McCarthy
90*

The critic calls the film a scream and a riotous comedy with irreverent topicality, performed with matchless aplomb and serving up pure pleasure from beginning to end. He highlights its expertly judged farce, surprising humanity, and strong performances, especially from Robin Williams, Nathan Lane, and Gene Hackman.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
8 March 1996 · ★★★/4 · Roger Ebert
75

The critic finds the American remake of La Cage aux Folles fresh thanks to strong casting and Elaine May's screenplay with its witty additions. He singles out the restrained performance from Robin Williams and the big laughs from Gene Hackman and Dianne Wiest as the conservative senator and his wife.

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

The remake is mostly satisfying with glitz and strong performances from Lane, Azaria and Hackman, but overly sincere and impeded by political correctness; it remains a genial crowd-pleaser with winning charm.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
8 March 1996 · Janet Maslin
70*

The critic finds the American remake of La Cage aux Folles tarted up with giddy ingenuity and political satire, with strong turns from Robin Williams and Nathan Lane. She notes that the material still shows its age despite the fresh South Beach setting and Elaine May dialogue.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · NF
55*

The critic calls the film an anodyne Hollywood remake of the French farce La Cage aux Folles. Williams delivers his best restrained performance in years and Hackman shows strong comic timing, but Lane's squealing turn tests patience and the script ultimately celebrates conformity rather than diversity.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
8 March 1996 · Kenneth Turan
30*

The critic finds much of the film pro forma and predictable, with a been-there-done-that quality to the drag comedy that makes it wearying. He singles out Gene Hackman and Dianne Wiest as the sharpest and funniest elements amid the formulaic aspects.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
11 March 1996 · Terrence Rafferty
30*

The critic views the film as a faithful but second-hand remake that largely contents itself with decking out the original French farce in American drag, praising Gene Hackman's expanded role as the standout element. He finds the leads skillful yet constrained by the source material and wishes the filmmakers had been bolder.

Read the full review →
The Independent
24 April 1996
20*

Mike Nichols's remake of La Cage aux Folles is a near-humourless two hours of trifles that one must endure to reach a pithy final shot of the two clans separated by an aisle.

Read the full review →
Consequence
10 March 2016
85*

The critic celebrates the film's 20th anniversary and enduring appeal as a smart farce about gender, sexuality, and hypocrisy. They single out the performances of Robin Williams and Nathan Lane, especially the toast-piercing scene where Albert tries to conform to masculine norms.

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