38
Metascore
7 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- 63St. Louis Post-DispatchEric MinkSt. Louis Post-DispatchEric MinkI can't imagine a true ''Rocky & Bullwinkle'' devotee who won't enjoy ''Boris and Natasha.'' [17 Apr 1992, p.9F]
- 60The New York TimesJohn J. O'ConnorThe New York TimesJohn J. O'ConnorFans of Rocky and Bullwinkle won't be disappointed.
- Made in 1988 but unreleased for several years, BORIS AND NATASHA isn't truly wretched, just undernourished. It tries hard to revive the anarchic spirit of Jay Ward's cartoons, but Boris and Natasha were only supporting characters there and nothing is done to make them interesting over the course of a feature film.
- 40Los Angeles TimesLos Angeles TimesDirector Charles Martin Smith and the four credited writers go for all-out zaniness, naturally, but it comes off like lowest-level Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker-Proft -- less Jay Ward than failed Mad magazine. [17 Apr 1992, p.F28]
- It starts out promising, using the conventions and trappings of the fondly remembered Ward cartoons, but after a bit of good silliness with maps, stock footage, and the flustered narrator, a convoluted espionage plot, and way too much effort in fleshing out our two heroic villains results in a film that's as hard to follow as it is to laugh at.
- The slapstick might appeal to some kids, although it’s extremely dumb and, even worse, just not funny.
- 25The Seattle TimesThe Seattle TimesThe jokes are labored and rarely clever, the narration is self-consciously cute and the pace, under director Charles Martin Smith, is that of the snail. "Boris and Natasha" should have been as fast, funny and clever as "SCTV" once was. Instead, "Boris and Natasha" looks more like a Saturday morning kiddie cartoon than a comedy show for grown-ups. [16 Apr 1992, p.E6]