Performance & Direction: Mitchell Review
Last updated: February 23, 2026
Quick Verdict: Hit or Flop?
Is Mitchell (1975) worth watching? According to our cinematic analysis, the film stands as a FLOP with a verified audience rating of 3.2/10. Whether you're looking for the box office collection, ending explained, or parents guide, our review covers everything you need to know about this Crime.
Cast Performances: A Masterclass
The success of any Crime is often anchored by its ensemble, and Mitchell features a noteworthy lineup led by Joe Don Baker . Supported by the likes of Martin Balsam and John Saxon , 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.
Final Verdict: Is it Worth Watching?
Story & Plot Summary: Mitchell
Quick Plot Summary: Released in 1975, Mitchell is a Crime, Drama, Action film directed by Andrew V. McLaglen. The narrative dives into the criminal underworld with a grounded sense of realism and complex morality. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict involving Joe Don Baker.
Ending Explained: Mitchell
Ending Breakdown: Directed by Andrew V. McLaglen, Mitchell attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to crime resolution.
The emotional climax centers on character transformation involving Joe Don Baker, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
Ending Analysis:
- Narrative Resolution: The story concludes by addressing its primary narrative threads, providing closure while maintaining some ambiguity.
- Character Arcs: Character journeys reach their narrative endpoints, reflecting the film's thematic priorities.
- Thematic Payoff: The ending reinforces the crime themes established throughout the runtime.
The final moments of Mitchell reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Mitchell Real vs. Reel: Is it Based on a True Story?
Mitchell incorporates elements from real criminal cases. As a crime, drama, action film directed by Andrew V. McLaglen, it navigates the space between factual accuracy and narrative engagement for Joe Don Baker's character.
Historical Context
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, focusing on emotional truth over strict chronology.
Accuracy Assessment: Mitchell adapts its source material for dramatic purposes. The film prioritizes thematic resonance over documentary precision.
Who Should Watch Mitchell?
Consider Watching If:
- You're a completist for Crime films
- You're curious despite mixed reviews
- You have low expectations and want casual entertainment
Top Cast: Mitchell
All Cast & Crew →










Where to Watch Mitchell Online?
Streaming Hub📺 Stream on
Amazon Prime Video
Amazon Prime Video with Ads🎟️ Rent on
Amazon Video🏷️ Buy on
Amazon VideoMitchell Parents Guide & Age Rating
1975 AdvisoryWondering about Mitchell age rating or if it's safe for kids? Here is our cinematic advisory:
⏱️ Runtime & Duration
The total runtime of Mitchell is 97 minutes (1h 37m). Ensuring you have enough time for the full cinematic experience.
Verdict Summary
Analyzing the overall audience sentiment, verified rating of 3.2/10, and global performance metrics, Mitchell is classified as a FLOP. It remains an essential part of the 1975 cinematic calendar.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Mitchell worth watching?
Mitchell is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Crime movies. It has a verified rating of 3.2/10 and stands as a FLOP in our box office analysis.
Where can I find Mitchell parents guide and age rating?
The official parents guide for Mitchell identifies it as R. Our detailed advisory section above covers all content warnings for families.
What is the total runtime of Mitchell?
The total duration of Mitchell is 97 minutes, which is approximately 1h 37m long.
Best Movies to Watch if you liked Mitchell
How Mitchell Compares & Where it Ranks
Critic Reviews for Mitchell
*** This review may contain spoilers *** A strange choice for Joel's final episode of MST3K, but it's hard to imagine what would be a more appropriate choice. Maybe one of the Russo-Finnish things they covered, like "Sinbad", or "The Day the Earth Froze" (to end on a high note), or "Monster-A-Go-Go" (which embodies the essence of all the crap that MST existed to make fun of.) I understand why some people don't like Joe Don Baker movies, but my own judgments of his films are influenced memories of one of my best friends in college (since passed away, alas). My friend was an older ex-Army sergeant who was a lot like Baker in many ways, and who would undoubtedly see a lot of himself in Baker's screen persona. A couple of tours of duty in the Army as an enlisted man and non-com had turned him into a self-described "FFS" (Fat F***ing Sergeant): an overweight, dyspeptic, burned out, cynical, hard drinking sad sack. But if you got to know him and got past the outer shell, he was one of the best friends a person could ask for; intelligent, loyal, generous, kind, and hard-working to the point of being a workaholic. I think that my friend would look at Baker's character in this film (and in "Final Justice") and see Mitchell in the same way he saw himself: someone who doesn't seem at all glamorous or fancy, but still can do whatever it takes to get the job done. And that's the whole point of Baker's character in "Mitchell": he doesn't look like anyone's idea of an 'action hero', but underneath the flab and the bad attitude is an incorruptible 'real man' who can kick the pretty boys' butts when the chips are down and who stays the course in spite of every obstacle and distraction that would stop a lesser, 'metrosexual' blow comb user. And if the movie does anything well, it at least gets this point across. It seems to me that Joel and the gang took any excuse to hammer on Baker when the he and his movie weren't really any worse than most of the stuff that came out at the time. In other words, they struck an attitude and then made up 'straw man' targets to attack to justify their attitude, hoping that the sheer venom of their rhetoric would keep the audience from actually making their own decisions...just like Dennis Miller does in his rants. Baker is somewhat heavy, yes, but he's no Charles Durning or Sidney Greenfield (two actors who you DID expect to have a coronary in any given scene). And his character is somewhat unkempt, but the whole beer/baby oil/revulsion thing they paint for him is at least three notches worse than what the movie presents. You don't believe for a moment that Linda Evans would ever go to bed with Mitchell, but OTOH the results wouldn't be nearly so revolting as Joel and the Bots would have you believe. So.. no, not a good film by any means. But approach it with an open mind, and you'll have a watchable cop flick with a twist on the usual 'action hero' casting and formula. - lemon_magic
movieMx Verified
This review has been verified for accuracy and editorial quality by our senior cinematic analysts.
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.










