IMDb > Leonard Part 6 (1987) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Leonard Part 6
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Leonard Part 6 More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]
Index 87 reviews in total 

31 out of 38 people found the following review useful:

Betrayal & Redemption

Author: Anthony Miller from Okemos, MI
9 April 2004

I saw this pus-filled boil on Cosby's rump while on vacation in Florida as a kid. I asked to see it - How was I to know? - I was only 6 years old. I think it was being shown at a theater at Universal Studios, and it had been a long, hot day of walking. Hell, I was glad just to be off my feet and out of the sun...that is, until the movie began.

I was confused from the start, thinking I must have missed a lot in the first 5 parts. But I thought it's gotta get better, Bill Cosby wouldn't allow this garbage to be shown to millions of kids like me as "entertainment" unless there was something funny in it. Then the meat patties - I don't remember much about the movie, I've left the nightmares in my past, but I can still remember how I nearly wretched at this grisly mess of a scene. It was no longer worth being in a comfy theater with AC, it was more like being in agony, trapped by a 6-yr. old kid's optimism that "Mr. Huxable" would be funny! Never happened.

An utter horror of a movie! It ruined a little kid's day, and I'm sure it ruined many others'. When I found out from my folks soon after that Bill Cosby himself had told people not to see it, I was hurt and betrayed. I have since gotten over it, so LP6 is purged from my nightmares, and I applauded Cos for removing this celluloid pollution from our airwaves. Redemption at last.

Was the above review useful to you?

34 out of 47 people found the following review useful:

Merciful God in heaven above!!!!!!!

1/10
Author: tipplerunkus
19 June 2003

Bill Cosby must have lost some kind of bet with Satan to end up making a film as mind-meltingly dreadful as "Leonard Part 6". A stupefyingly unfunny, self-indulgent mess of a film that will have you wanting to tare your skin off with your fingernails just so you'll have something else to do.

Was the above review useful to you?

26 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

Bad, bad, baad

1/10
Author: tomimt from Finland
13 June 2004

There are bad movies like the ones Ed wood used to make and there are bad movies like "Leonard part 6".

Now the difference between these two groups is, that when you watch Ed Wood movies you can laugh at the fact how serious he was. But with this supposed to be comedy you are just dazed at the fact how shamelessly this movie has been made relying only on the 80's comedy icon Bill Cosby.

I can see how the script of this agent parody might have looked funny, with all the James Bond jokes it has, but somewhere in the making everyone just forgot to do their jobs properly, thus ending up with this pile of totally unfunny crap.

As stated nothing works, special effects are bad and they probably looked outdated the year this movie came out. Actors are bored and they don't even try and same can be said of director Paul Weiland.

Avoid if you can.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Saw them make the film: Not fun. Watched the film: Not good.

1/10
Author: thomas.meagher
10 July 2000

This film was made nearby where I lived in 1986. Many residents had to put up with trailers on the street and generators running into all hours of the evening. We did however, get to see Cosby shoot a scene, so that was fun.

When it came time to see his creation, the disappointment was even greater having expected at least something of fair value. The film is disjointed, as if the writer quit in the middle. The relationship between Cosby - a master spy living in an enormous house - and his unhappy wife (who lives in the enormous house next door, which is supposed to be a funny circumstance) took time to develop. Then it was immediately lost in some mad-cap chase scenes in a warehouse.

There is nothing interesting about this film. There must be a story behind how it got made. Cosby is a man of talent, but this film showed none.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

Made me never want to eat Jello again.

1/10
Author: ecwmadman316 from Sheboygan, WI
6 July 2002

Three words sum up what's wrong with this movie, Joe Don Baker. Serously, what the hell was that? It's like a bad version of Dr Dolittle made by acid heads. I actually saw this movie in the theater as a child and even at the tender age of 6 asked my Mom if we could leave and began crying when we didn't. This movie sucks!

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

One of those "Onion" Movies.

1/10
Author: lambiepie-2 from Los Angeles, CA
13 July 2003



You can't help but cry.

This film is awful. I found NOTHING redeeming about it, not on a camp level, not even on a comatose level.

You'd just expect more from the talented Bill Cosby, and wonder with all the projects out there, why he chose this crap to be a part of.

He should have just collected all the money and donated it to a charity -- or the R & D Department over at JELLO. The money would have went to a better cause.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

Worse Than Worse

1/10
Author: Bolesroor from New York, NY USA
17 September 2008

I love the IMDb but I've noticed a very sad trend... seems like users here feel they have to defend truly terrible movies. Just look at the user reviews for "Hudson Hawk" or "Ishtar" and you'll see titles like "Not As Bad As They Say," "Under-Rated Classic," and the offensive "I LOVE This Movie."

Grow up! It's not a good idea to rescue trash cinema from the dumpster. Let's be adults and let films like "Leonard, Part 6" get the treatment they deserve. And oh how this film deserves a lot of treatment... "Leonard" is a movie with no redeeming value. Bill Cosby stars as a secret agent who has to save the world from an evil woman who blah blah blah... why bother? The movie tries to be an action film while simultaneously spoofing action films. (Schwarzenegger would later fail at this with the nauseating "Last Action Hero") What we're left with is a mess of a movie and Cosby- one of the all-time great comedians- can't even get one genuine laugh out of the deal. I have a passion for bad movies- B-Movies, exploitation flicks, horror films, you name it- but this movie lacks the impact to even be bad. It's just stupid.

How stupid? At the time of the film's release Cosby himself went on TV and asked people NOT to see the movie because it was so bad. I cannot think of a single instance in the history of Hollywood where an actor- or anyone- has done ANTI-publicity for a movie. Bill said this because he cares and he wanted to save you time and money.

So do I. While it might be tempting to listen to the revisionist reviewers who want to impress you with their outrageous opinion and 10-star ratings sometimes its better to just turn the page. Now let's all go someplace else and do something different and forget we were ever here.

GRADE: D-

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

What a dud!

2/10
Author: gridoon
20 January 2002

A complete dud. Stuck with a stupid script and in the middle of moronic proceedings, Bill Cosby looks utterly bored and desperate. This is the type of film that has NOTHING redeeming about it, and even thinking about it for a minute longer than its running time is a real waste of effort. Worthless. (*)

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Why did Cosby make this?

1/10
Author: jhaggardjr from Chicago, Illinois
23 May 2000

Back in 1987, Bill Cosby was the king of comedy on television. His '80s sitcom "The Cosby Show" was the #1 TV show in America. So one question still puzzles me today. During his time away from the show, why did he produce, wrote the original story to, and star in "Leonard Part 6"? This movie is totally inept from beginning to end. No laughs. No excitement. No fun. Just 85 minutes of 100% ineptitude. Forget about it!

No stars (out of four)

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

This Film Belongs in the "6th" Level of Cinematic Hell

Author: tfrizzell from United States
12 October 2001

"Leonard Part 6". Not even the title makes any sense. There were never five before it (thank goodness) and there would be no sequel to this bomb of epic proportions. Bill Cosby took some time during his television show in the mid-1980s to make this film that sported a rather large budget, but little else. Cosby stars as a secret agent who is trying to stop a mad-woman from ruling the world. Vegetarians protect the mastermind and Cosby's primary form of transportation is an ostrich of all things. My goodness what was Cosby thinking here? Turkey (0 stars out of 5).

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history