Groundhog Day artwork

Groundhog Day Review

1993Harold RamisMovie

A comedy with the structure of a philosophy problem, and it never once stops to explain the rules.

CriticGreat
Users9.2 out of 10

Vote your grade

Category grades
CategoryCriticUsers
PlotExceptional
CinematographyAverage
ActingGreat
DialogueGreat
OverallGreat

The screenplay is the achievement, and its most disciplined choice is refusing to explain anything. No curse, no mechanism, no scientist with a theory, just a man waking up to the same radio broadcast, which forces the film to be about behaviour rather than plot. The progression is beautifully staged, from exploitation to despair to the suicides played as escalating punchlines to the slow accumulation of skills, and Ramis trusts the audience to notice the piano and the ice sculpture without being told how long any of it took.

Bill Murray is doing the hardest thing in his career, keeping the contempt legible while gradually draining it away, so the eventual decency reads as earned rather than as a conversion. Andie MacDowell is the film's limitation, a character defined mostly by what Phil wants from her. The Punxsutawney of the movie is a set of comic props that pay off again and again. It is a broad studio comedy that turns out to contain a real argument about how a life gets improved, and it is funny the whole way through.

Reviewed Sep 7, 2026 · Last verified Sep 7, 2026 · How we grade

Groundhog Day at a glance

Official site
Director
Harold Ramis
Runtime
101 min
Rating
PG
Release year
1993

What’s your grade?

Grade by category
Plot
Cinematography
Acting
Dialogue

No account needed. Sign in so your grades follow you and count once. · how vote integrity works

Comments

Plain text, 500 characters. Be sharp, not cruel.

0/500

No comments yet. Have the first take.

More movies reviews