If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Good action, multiple plot twists, exotic locales. This has all you need in a spy caper. There are excellent well-shot action scenes, familiar faces, respect paid to the Russian location and people, and it all moves along at a decent fast pace.People who hated this 1995 offering are always comparing it to the 60s films. But they were made a lifetime ago! Now lumped together as one tidy trilogy (due to the temporal proximity of their productions) Harry Palmer was then touted as a less glamorous, thinking man's Bond. But the movies were still pretty sensationalist and fantastical.A lot had changed since, and what was right for the big screen in the 60s would have to reinterpreted to a modern context. And for the small screen. The stylistic difference is therefore justified for that reason - as well as for the lack of a big-screen budget! More impressive it should be that they got some big names for the project!! Spy movies aren't the greatest genre for keeping continuity, with the political landscape in constant flux. But espionage is something that will always be sensational. (That said, the stultifyingly vapid Blue Ice, another Michael Caine-led spy film released three years prior, failed to thrill - but that's my opinion.)The film would have been improved with a more dramatic score, and I'm sure it would have made greater impact, been more memorable, and be held in higher esteem if it had it. But for what Bullet to Beijing was - a direct-to-video movie - it was an impressive and enjoyable work. The storytelling and pacing made it feel like it could be a big-screen movie, and otherwise it hit the spot in the right places. Location shooting is not as common these days, so in a historical context, Bullet to Beijing is something that is getting rarer and more special by the day. Despite contemporary reviewers apparently having been rather underwhelmed by it.

Please disregard the review of this movie by "Dr_Yvon_COULARDEAU"......he clearly entered a review of some other film here by mistake....i think he was trying to review some version of "the Thomas Crown Affair".....first, there is no character in this movie named "Crown".........there is also no robbery with an insurance investigator involved.......i think it is odd that Dr_Yvon_COULARDEAU did not correct his mistake after he realized he reviewed the wrong movie........i think it is odd as well that no one from IMDb noticed either..........IMDb.......may i review a three stooges film and put it here or vice versa?.........Dr, a question.......do you often lose track of where you are?

Okay so it's not as good as the Ipcress File etc, but did anybody really expect that? Sure it doesn't all add up and the continuity is a bit suspect but I have to say that I really thought it was good fun. I was surprised to see it was made in 1995 because Jason Connery was sporting a very 1980's hair do, I actually thought it was Martin Fry from ABC. In summary, a bit shaky but it holds your attention throughout and has some good lines.

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!