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.
December 30, 2017
In addition to the physical machines there is a lot of deus ex-machina involved too, but only a critic would carp about that. Just go to watch the most remarkable things.
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
Page 1 of 3