Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Jakoba True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Cody One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

HotToastyRag If you loved the Harry Palmer movies in the 1960s—The Ipcress File, Funeral in Berlin, and Billion Dollar Brain—you'll be happy to hear that thirty years later, Michael Caine agreed with you! He made two more Harry Palmer films, Bullet to Beijing and its sequel Midnight in Saint Petersburg, both costarring Jason Connery and Michael Gambon.In this one, Michael Caine is forced to retire, but isn't slowed down a bit in his secret spy career. He's approached to work for Michael Gambon, with Jason Connery and Mia Sara as his colleagues, but who can he really trust? I really liked this spy thriller because it wasn't too complicated, so I could easily keep up with the plot twists. Some of the other Harry Palmer movies were a bit too complex for me. Also, even though Michael Caine makes several references to his age, since it's been thirty years since he played Harry Palmer, it's fun to see him still fighting the bad guys with as much pizazz as he had before. Jason and Mia are really likable, so there's plenty to root for in this movie. Rent it if you're a Michael Caine fan or are in the mood for a light action film, and for a double feature, rent the sequel!

MartinHafer After almost thirty years, Michael Caine is back playing Harry Palmer. However, it has been THIRTY YEARS--and, like the expression goes, you can never go back--and that certainly is true of "Bullet to Beijing". Unlike the earlier Palmer stories, Len Deighton was not involved with this one...and I think it shows. The first three films of the series ("The Ipcress File", "Funeral in Berlin" and "Billion Dollar Brain") were great--a nice alternative to a Bond film. Here, however, it looks like there is a lot more Bond and a lot less Harry Palmer.After three decades with the British secret service, Palmer is summarily retired without so much as a thank you. Soon, he receives an offer to work for someone else--though they don't identify who they are--they just give him a ticket to meet them in Russia. Harry takes the offer (why?) and soon is transported into a world completely unlike his earlier film efforts. Here is the problem--the film is again and again an ACTION film. But the earlier films deliberately avoided being action films. Sure, things happened--but most of the time Palmer stood by on the sidelines. And, there were none of the usual insane James Bond miraculous escapes. Here in "Bullet to Beijing", it's one action sequence after another after another--including way too many shootouts that resulted in folks with pistols taking out many folks with machine guns!!! Now I know a marksman can do amazing things with a pistol--but to again and again take out baddies with automatic weapons?! And, the other major problem is that folks keep changing sides!! Again and again, you need a scorecard to keep track of who is one who's side! To me, this just seemed sloppy. The overall effort is a passable ACTION film but one severely disappointing to those expecting the Harry Palmer of old. It's made worse by the end, where, inexplicably, the baddies just let Palmer go after he destroys their evil plan!!! Uggh.

gridoon2018 Michael Caine slips comfortably and amusingly into one of the most famous roles of his career, Harry Palmer (AKA the anti-Bond), after a 30-year break. The film itself is both pleasingly old-fashioned (much of it takes place on a train, by far the most traditional means of transportation in this genre), and successfully updated to be relevant in the mid-1990s, post-Cold War era, where spies from all over the world are suddenly labeled "redundant" by their governments. And yet, the murky, complicated games of espionage still go on, only with new objects and new players now (but old friends and old enemies as well). The story is slightly meandering in the middle but it has its surprises too, and the film is well-produced (especially for a TV project); the relatively (in comparison to James Bond) small scale of its action sequences generally works in their favor. It's been a long time since I last saw the final theatrical Palmer film, "Billion Dollar Brain", but I think "Bullet To Beijing" is superior to that one at least. **1/2 out of 4.

wykes I was surprised to see this film on the shelf for sale as I'd never heard of it and never knew anyone had tried to resuscitate Michael Caine as Harry Palmer. I came to the conclusion it wasn't going to be very good compared with the original Palmer films and would be like other attempts at revivals i.e. not very good. If you watch this film with this frame of mind you won't be too disappointed. Mr Caine still gets to do his cheeky one liners to those in authority but Harry appears to have grown less subtle in his later years(unlike his new black framed glasses) Certainly not a Harry Palmer film of the old ilk, but could a post Cold War version ever be? Not a bad Michael Caine film which he just does for the money, just one he's done when there are no good scripts on offer!