Is Inspector Gadget Worth Watching?
Answer: Maybe not, Inspector Gadget is likely a skip if you enjoy Action movies.
It features a runtime of 78 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:Inspector Gadget is a confirmed FLOP based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 4.5/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Action, Adventure, Comedy, Family genre.
Answer: Maybe not, Inspector Gadget is likely a skip if you enjoy Action movies.
It features a runtime of 78 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1999, Inspector Gadget emerges as a significant entry in the Action, Adventure, Comedy, Family domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of John Brown is a bumbling but well-intentioned security guard who is badly injured in an explosion planned by an evil mastermind. Unlike standard genre fare, Inspector Gadget attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Action is often anchored by its ensemble, and Inspector Gadget features a noteworthy lineup led by Matthew Broderick . Supported by the likes of Rupert Everett and Joely Fisher , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of Inspector Gadget (1999) is negative. With an audience rating of 4.5/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Inspector Gadget is a Action, Adventure, Comedy, Family film that delivers high-octane sequences and adrenaline-pumping confrontations that keep viewers on the edge of their seats. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
The narrative structure follows a classic action blueprint: establish the protagonist's world, introduce a formidable antagonist, and escalate the stakes through increasingly intense confrontations. John Brown is a bumbling but well-intentioned security guard who is badly injured in an explosion planned by an evil mastermind. He is taken to a laboratory, where Brenda, a leading robotics surgeon, replaces his damaged limbs with state-of-the-art gadgets and tools. Named "Inspector Gadget" by the press, John -- along with his niece, Penny, and her trusty dog, Brain -- uses his new powers to discover who was behind the explosion. The film balances spectacular set pieces with character moments, ensuring the action serves the story rather than overwhelming it.
Ending Breakdown: Inspector Gadget attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to action resolution.
The climactic sequence delivers on the escalating tension, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Inspector Gadget reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Consider Watching If:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $75.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $134.4M |
| Trade Verdict | FINANCIAL DISAPPOINTMENT |
The estimated production budget for Inspector Gadget is $75.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.










Google Play Movies
YouTube
Google Play Movies
YouTubeAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 4.5/10, and global collection metrics, Inspector Gadget stands as a challenging project for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1999 cinematic year.
Inspector Gadget is considered a flop based on audience ratings of 4.5/10 and lower collections.
Based on the low rating of 4.5/10, Inspector Gadget may not be worth watching unless you are a die-hard fan.
Inspector Gadget may be available for rent or purchase on digital platforms like Apple TV, Google Play, or Amazon Prime Video. Specific streaming availability can vary by country.
Another one rated too low, I assume that is due to it - so I read - not being "faithful" to the original television series. I have never watched that so I couldn't judge it in those terms, but as a film I enjoyed it I won't lie. 'Inspector Gadget' is very silly but self-aware, in a similar vein to 'Looney Tunes: Back in Action' and 'The Cat in the Hat'. I enjoyed those two films and, while this isn't as good as those, I liked this enough. I probably wont ever rewatch, but I can see younger audiences finding enjoyment with it. There aren't, admittedly, any super noteworthy performances here, but that's not to say Matthew Broderick & Co. are bad in this - they give what's necessary. There's a few interesting cameos in there, too. There are a couple of fairly amusing moments, but it's the dumbness that I think they do well - it's stupid and they know it. Like those other films I mentioned earlier, you're gonna annoy a lot of people by doing that so I can see why this gets hate - I don't think 44% is fair though, but each to their own of course.
**A film that entertains without marveling, and that can frustrate fans of the cartoon.** Inspector Gadget was an amazing cartoon, but it had a brief stint on Portuguese television. I remember him, and I really enjoyed seeing him, but I don't remember seeing him much longer than four or five years. Despite this, it was one of the cartoons that I was most interested in as a child. The live-action movie we have here, however, doesn't do it justice... which doesn't mean it's necessarily bad. Plain and simple, the film is what it is: a piece of entertainment full of weaknesses. Designed to appeal to children and teenagers, I have serious doubts about the film's ability to appeal to adults, particularly fans of the original cartoon. It's not a bad movie, it's minimally funny and has some effective comic material, but most of the time it fails to make you laugh. Also, the film has bad dialogue and the script is quite poor and poorly written. So poorly written that I'm afraid of spoiling it if I say too much, so I'll limit myself to saying that the film follows the creation of Inspector Gadget and the birth of his archenemy, Claw. The cast is one of the most redeeming qualities of this film. Even with a basic story and very weak material on hand, each actor did the best they could, and I'm pretty sure they all tried to put in the effort and be professional. However, some did better than others. Rupert Everett, for example, makes the most of his charisma and steals our attention whenever he appears, with well-placed, sarcastic humour. Matthew Broderick doesn't do poorly in this job either, but he seems to find much more difficulties with his character. Joely Fisher is attractive but has little to do. Mike Hagerty and Michelle Trachtenberg are relegated to the shadows most of the time. Disney invested some money in the film, and it shows in the quantity and quality of the visual effects and CGI used. Gadget is very similar to the original, with the same clothes and the most striking gadgets from the cartoon, as well as the problems, confusions and breakdowns that have always characterized the character. The sets and filming locations help and do their part, as does the soundtrack, which contains a new version of the old cartoon theme song.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.
Explore the full watch order, ratings, and collection details.
View Full Franchise