‘Megalopolis’ reviews: Divisive film is either ‘profound’ or ‘pretentious,’ depending on who you ask
Francis Ford Coppola‘s “Megalopolis,” about the clash between an architect and a corrupt mayor over the future of a grand city, has had a rocky journey to the big screen. After developing it off-and-on for decades, the renowned filmmaker ultimately self-financed the epic and premiered it at the Cannes Film Festival to mixed reviews. Commenting on that critical response, a trailer for the film then referenced negative reviews of past Coppola films now regarded as classics. Just one problem, though — those quotes were fake. Rest assured that any reviews quoted in this piece about “Megalopolis” are the real deal.
Thus far, “Megalopolis” has a MetaCritic rating of 56 based on 54 reviews counted: 24 are positive reviews, 22 are mixed reviews, and eight are outright pans. On Rotten Tomatoes, which classifies reviews simply as positive or negative, the film has a 50% rating based on 157 reviews: 79 critics give it a thumbs up, 78 critics give it a thumbs down. You can’t get much more divisive than that. The RT critics’ consensus says, “More of a creative manifesto than a cogent narrative feature, Francis Ford Coppola’s ‘Megalopolis’ is an overstuffed opus that’s equal parts stimulating and slapdash.”
Siddhant Adlakha (IGN) gives the film one of its strongest recommendations, though admits “it frustrates and awes in equal measure — sometimes simultaneously.” David Ehrlich (IndieWire) says the film “is nothing if not the boldest and most open-hearted of [Coppola’s] many bids to stop time before it’s too late.” Farah Cheded (Paste) argues, “‘Megalopolis’ similarly leaves you with a hunger to dive below the surface … untamed as it is by any conventional filmmaking wisdom.” And David Fear (Rolling Stone) writes, “Had he made and released this at any point in the early 21st century, it would have felt singular. In 2024, this personal, profound, perversely optimistic movie about slouching toward Utopia Now on a self-financed $120 million budget feels like a f*cking unicorn.”
Less kind is Peter Bradshaw (The Guardian), who thinks the film is “ambitious and earnestly intended” but ultimately “a passion project without passion: a bloated, boring and bafflingly shallow film, full of high-school-valedictorian verities about humanity’s future.” Moira Macdonald (Seattle Times) calls it “a beautiful mess.” According to Nicholas Barber (BBC), “You can’t accuse [Coppola] of lacking ambition,” and it’s “wonderful” that the director finally got the film made, but “this pretentious, portentous curio will test the patience of everyone else” besides a potential cult of followers. And Maureen Lee Lenker (Entertainment Weekly) says, “Somehow ‘Megalopolis’ manages to be both chaotic and unspeakably boring.”
What’s interesting is that many of the positive and negative reviews actually seem to agree on the film’s admirable ambition and often confounding execution. Loving or hating it seems to depend on how much latitude you’re willing to give a legendary filmmaker for his sheer chutzpah. So are the Oscar hopes completely dashed for Coppola’s labor of love?
Well, to be fair, critics have been bitterly divided over Best Picture winners before (“Crash,” “Green Book“). And other films with mixed reviews have been nominated for the top prize (“The Reader,” “The Blind Side,” “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close,” “Joker”). But even by those standards “Megalopolis” could be a tough sell, especially when even the most laudatory reviews are using words like “nuts” and “batshit.” But the film’s epic vision and scope may yet land the film in several crafts races. If you build it, they will come.