Thunderball - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Thunderball Reviews

Page 1 of 3
January 2, 2011
Even James Bond can miss his mark.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/5
July 29, 2002
Read More | Original Score: 2/5
October 19, 2012
The ambition is evident throughout, but the execution just doesn't have enough energy to sustain it. THUNDERBALL is very sluggish.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
June 30, 2012
Turgidly paced and overly reliant on less-than-thrilling underwater sequences, it's the "Moonraker" of Sean Connery's run -a misstep defined by heyday technology that the producers thought would look cool in the era but feels hopelessly stale today.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/5
May 23, 2004
Read More | Original Score: 2/5
May 6, 2008
Slightly bloated Bond, with too much technology for my taste and a climactic slaughter that's a little too mindless to be much fun.
October 23, 2015
Terence Young's direction is nothing if not taut, whisking the narrative along with the speed and precision of a jet plane, defying one to express boredom.
January 1, 2000
Classic 007 -- not the best picture in the long-running series, to be sure, but a more-than-worthwhile diversion for the action-loving escapist in us all.
Full Review | Original Score: 3/4
December 20, 1965
With a few edits Thunderball could have been one of the best Bond films, but as it is, it's still one of the better ones.
Full Review | Original Score: 3/4
November 7, 2002
It's remarkably good fun. It's retro enough to be amusing in the dull bits and timeless enough to be fresh and vital today.
Full Review | Original Score: 4/5
July 26, 2002
| Original Score: 5/5
April 14, 2003
A big step down from Goldfinger, but still moderately entertaining.
| Original Score: 3/5
October 23, 2015
Connery's last exceptional Bond as it gives 007 a competent villain, a thrilling adventure in an unusual setting, great Bond Babes and one of the series' all-time best scenes.
Full Review | Original Score: 8.5/10
June 17, 2012
A particularly energetic, jaunty Bond adventure, the kind that is just plain fun to watch, in a perfectly relaxed and undemanding register.
Full Review | Original Score: 7/10
May 6, 2008
There's visible evidence that the reported $5.5 million budget was no mere publicity figure; it's posh all the way.
January 1, 2000
It's too long and doesn't make any sense at times, but it's a real jaw-dropper (especially for 1965).
Full Review | Original Score: 3.5/5
August 9, 2002
While enjoyable, this is probably the most overrated Bond movie.
| Original Score: 3/5
November 21, 2003
If it doesn't live up to its illustrious predecessors...well, it still has Connery, and that's a plus in anybody's book.
Full Review | Original Score: 7/10
November 19, 2004
| Original Score: 3/5
February 12, 2009
It was still fun despite its shortcomings.
Full Review | Original Score: B
Page 1 of 3