Reviews provided by RottenTomatoes
A movie that speaks well and truly to essentials in the kind of unhurried terms that most modern movies don't even dare to espouse.
Dallas Morning News:
The film is visually stunning. Its images will stay with you long after their meaning has vanished.
New York Times:
Supernatural is not much better than subhuman: Hollywood is still, in the year 2000, disinclined to let black actors play human beings.
Los Angeles Times:
So meticulous in its craftsmanship and so earnest in its storytelling that it feels both physically and spiritually airbrushed.
It should be noted that the movie works uncommonly well for what it is; what's aggravating is the lost opportunity.
Much of what happens, regardless of whether its supposed to be touched by magic, seems patently phony.
The principal characters, forced in the bright light of the fairway to work not just as allegory but as viable, identifiable human beings, become ludicrous.
It's a feel-nothing movie, too calculated and cautious to locate anything that might resemble a genuine or spontaneous life moment.
New York Magazine/Vulture:
Another lusciously produced, emotionally clammy Redford enterprise -- forced, phony mythmaking filled with tinged sunsets and full moons.
The men and women inhabiting this motion pictures are types, ciphers, and mouthpieces for slogans, not individuals we can believe in and care for.
It handles a sports movie the way Billie Holiday handled a trashy song, by finding the love and pain beneath the story.
Most of the racial issues inherent in the setup of Bagger Vance are so painstakingly submerged that they barely register.
San Francisco Chronicle:
The competition sequences on the golf links, with the splendid camera work of Michael Ballhaus, and exactly the right amount of digital tweaking, are the real revelations of this film.