Is Richard III Worth Watching?
Answer: Yes, Richard III is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Drama movies.
It features a runtime of 104 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:Richard III is a confirmed HIT based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 6.7/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Drama, War genre.
Answer: Yes, Richard III is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Drama movies.
It features a runtime of 104 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1995, Richard III emerges as a significant entry in the Drama, War domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of A murderous lust for the British throne sees Richard III descend into madness. Unlike standard genre fare, Richard III attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Drama is often anchored by its ensemble, and Richard III features a noteworthy lineup led by Ian McKellen . Supported by the likes of Annette Bening and Jim Broadbent , 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 Richard III (1995) is mixed. With an audience rating of 6.7/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Richard III is a Drama, War film that explores complex human emotions and relationships through nuanced character development. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Breakdown: Richard III concludes its story with a mix of closure and open interpretation. The finale presents its approach to drama resolution.
The emotional climax centers on character transformation, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Richard III reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Richard III uses real-world events as narrative inspiration. As a drama, war film, it navigates the space between factual accuracy and narrative engagement.
The film takes creative liberties to enhance dramatic impact. Core events maintain connection to source material while adapting for theatrical presentation.
Creative interpretation shapes the final narrative, with attention to period detail and historical context.
Accuracy Assessment: Richard III adapts its source material for dramatic purposes. The film prioritizes thematic resonance over documentary precision.
Worth Watching If You:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Worldwide Gross | $2.7M |
| Trade Verdict | CLEAN HIT |










Amazon Prime Video
fuboTV
MGM+ Amazon Channel
MGM Plus Roku Premium Channel
MGM Plus
Philo
Amazon Prime Video with Ads
Fandango At Home
Fandango At HomeAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 6.7/10, and global collection metrics, Richard III stands as a successful venture for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1995 cinematic year.
Richard III has received mixed reviews with a 6.7/10 rating, making it a moderate success with the audience.
Richard III is a mixed bag. It might be worth watching if you're a fan of Drama, War movies, but read reviews first.
Richard III is currently available for streaming on Amazon Prime Video. You can also check for it on platforms like Amazon Prime Video, fuboTV, MGM+ Amazon Channel, MGM Plus Roku Premium Channel, MGM Plus, Philo, Amazon Prime Video with Ads depending on your region.
Co-writers Ian McKellen and Richard Loncraine (who also directs) set their Richard III in 1930s Britain, and make the infamous hunchback a fascist warmonger plotting to usurp the throne. Today's English monarchy is, at best, nominal, but even way back in the 1930s there wasn't much to be gained by usurping it. Then again, the film takes place in an alternate reality where the War of the Roses occurs 450 years after the true historical conflict did. I don’t mind so much that royalty has endured those four centuries and a half; what does bother me is that language has not evolved in the interim at the same rate as, say, warfare. Why on Earth would Richard (McKellen), who is neither dumb nor crazy, use the expression “my kingdom for a horse” when he could be asking for a tank instead? This line is only in the movie because it’s in the play – but then, a great many things that are in the play aren’t in the film, and viceversa, so why keep this particular bit? I mean, it couldn’t be because the audience is expecting it, even though it makes zero sense given the circumstances, could it? Did they think diehard Shakespeare fans would riot otherwise? Well, if there were such a thing as hardcore Shake-heads, I assure you they would have rioted long before this point. Similarly outdated is a scene in which several characters who have been at each other’s throats are compelled to swear mutual oaths of loyalty. As Al Pacino’s superb documentary Looking for Richard rightly points out, at the time that the original play is set this would be serious business, because only people who want to go to hell would swear an oath and not keep it. Ditto the scene where Richard blames his deformity on Queen Elizabeth's witchcraft; this is an accusation that would have been given credence in the 1470s, but not so much in the 1930s. All things considered, it’s somewhat ironic that McKellen had a hand in the script, because his performance is worthy of much better material. His body language, in particular, is priceless – this Richard looks like a super-intelligent ape masquerading as a British Army field marshal. And when he breaks the fourth wall – another device that works better on a theater stage –, it feels as if Richard is letting the viewers in on that the entire movie is a sick joke he's playing on the other characters. If only.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.