User Score
2.9

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 23 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 23
  2. Negative: 14 out of 23
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. chw
    Aug 22, 2014
    5
    The acting in Battle of the Year was terrible. Nobody acted like an actor. Nobody did a good job acting, which made the movie quite bad. Interesting story, but if they had high-budget actors who can actually act it would be a way better movie.
  2. Nov 22, 2014
    5
    Battle of the Year was alright. Terrible acting, everyone was just reading their lines right off the script, there wasn't any emotion whatsoever. The story also lagged in creativity, which is why it's a 5.
Metascore
29

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 21
  2. Negative: 11 out of 21
  1. Reviewed by: Ken McIntyre
    Nov 15, 2013
    40
    The athleticism of the final ‘battles’ impresses, but even then, the routines are marred by trick-edits and headache-inducing 3D.
  2. Reviewed by: Simon Braund
    Nov 11, 2013
    20
    Dismal, cliché-ridden stuff.
  3. Reviewed by: Sara Stewart
    Sep 30, 2013
    50
    At the risk of sounding 100, I think it’s regrettable this film had to be shot in digital 3-D. Both those formats actually do a frustrating disservice to the depiction of the action, making them look choppier, more flickery and occasionally blurrier than they would otherwise.