User Reviews (87)

  • thomas.meagher10 July 2000
    1/10
    Saw them make the film: Not fun. Watched the film: Not good.
    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.
  • Anthony Miller9 April 2004
    Betrayal & Redemption
    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.
  • ecwmadman3166 July 2002
    1/10
    Made me never want to eat Jello again.
    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!
  • tipplerunkus19 June 2003
    1/10
    Merciful God in heaven above!!!!!!!
    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.
  • tomimt13 June 2004
    1/10
    Bad, bad, baad
    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.
  • lambiepie-213 July 2003
    1/10
    One of those "Onion" Movies.
    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.
  • gridoon20 January 2002
    2/10
    What a dud!
    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. (*)
  • Bolesroor17 September 2008
    1/10
    Worse Than Worse
    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-
  • jhaggardjr23 May 2000
    1/10
    Why did Cosby make this?
    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)
  • tfrizzell12 October 2001
    This Film Belongs in the "6th" Level of Cinematic Hell
    "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).
  • Gislef17 August 1998
    1/10
    What was the Cos thinking?
    This movie fails on every level possible: as a spy movie, as a parody of a spy movie, as a Cosby feature film, as a piece of entertainment. I have no idea what they were trying to do here, but the result is _not_ a pretty picture.
  • FeverDog28 August 2002
    One of the worse movies ever made??? *SPOILERS*
    Warning: Spoilers
    LEONARD PART 6 is one of those titles that spring to mind whenever one wants a definitive example of a bad movie. But is it really that terrible? Since it was being shown today on the Black Starz channel, I decided to see for myself. Perhaps it's just misunderstood, or maybe there's untapped camp potential in it, and it's about time I watched the whole thing to find out.

    The verdict? It's bad, yes, but it's only bad - not offensive, ugly, tasteless or depressing. The premise actually had promise - a retired spy (whose assignments 1-5 were classified "in the interest of national security") returns to thwart the plans of a vegetarian madwoman who, with the help of armies of mind-controlled animals, is bent on world domination. But, boy, is the final product a lethargic bore. The movie plays like an experiment to see just how slow an eighty-minute movie can feel; it's badly written and directed, the actors seem lost and lacking in energy, and there's no evidence of even the slightest bit of intelligence on either side of the camera.

    Is there any reason to see this movie? If you're a MST3K fan, perhaps; there's plenty of dead air to weave your own snide commentary through, and the movie even features Joe Don "MITCHELL" Baker in a small part. Or maybe you've heard about all the blatant Coca-Cola product placement in the movie, and keeping count of them could provide something for your brain to do. That's what I did, but I counted only three Coke plugs - not a whole lot, granted, but the second sighting was inexcusable. (A full bottle of the Pepsi rival is held in the middle of the frame for an extended shot of meaningless chitchat - it wasn't being sipped from, just held there for no real reason.)

    What else? Well, the actresses who play Leonard's wife and daughter are quite beautiful, the villianess embodies the appropriate, Cruella de Vil-like dementia that the role requires, and the various animals deployed in the plan - ostriches, zebras, anteaters, frogs, trout and lobsters - are fun (or, rather, they'd be fun in a livelier movie). But what's up with that final scene? Is dumping pasta and cake on your loved one in a fancy restaurant anyone's idea of foreplay?

    Alas, despite a half-hearted chuckle or two that this movie produces, there's no camp value to be found. LEONARD PART 6 doesn't inspire any venomous hatred like, say, FREDDY GOT FINGERED does - it's more like a "bad boring" movie along the lines of GLITTER. Whether that's better or worse, I leave you to decide.
  • sixtwentysix30 April 2004
    A Vehicle with no engine, windows, steering wheel, tires...
    This is the first movie I can remember wanting to get up and walk out on. Ladies and gentlemen, I was eight. Much to my horror, my ride wasn't coming for another 45 minutes to pick us up from the theater. Agonizing minutes of my life were slowly ripped away as this farce of a film played out.

    Easily one of the worst films I've ever seen, I've seen it since it scarred my youthful optimism of film.

    You know something? This film gets NO better with age...

    Painful to watch. Yet another in a long line of horrible movie decisions made by the Cos'. How can a man so funny with standup and so roundly enjoyed on television fail so utterly and completely?

    The best metaphor to describe this, imagine you had a Caddilac (Cosby), then you took away its engine (convoluted unfunny screenplay), the wheels (horrid casting) and crashed out its windows, slashed the leather seats and took away the steering wheel (directing). One of Cosby's cash filled zebra skin wallets could have directed this better! What you have left is a broken down wreck of a VEHICLE that is up on blocks in someone's unmowed lawn.
  • Praetor30 September 1998
    1/10
    One of the worst films ever from a major studio
    It's hard for me to put into words how utterly horrid this motion picture is. Sometimes when a film is bad enough it's considered good. But other times, especially when the film is a comedy, the film can be so bad it is painful to watch. The latter is the case with Leonard Part 6. This film not only contains horrible performances by Bill Cosby and nearly everyone else in the cast, but also an plot so mind-numbingly bad the only reason you might continue to watch is for the same reason you would stare at a train wreck: It's so horrific you can't take your eyes off of it.
  • LivnDeadGrrrl2 November 2001
    1/10
    Pile of crap
    Sadly, here lies the death of Bill Cosby we knew as a kid. He was always so funny and with this film he took a hatchet and hacked away all those warm thoughts. I don't know what he was thinking. This movie was horrible, from start to finish. I kept watching it only thinking "It has to get better..." and it didn't. I am ashamed to say I saw it... all of it. Immediately after I said with a deep sigh "There is 2 hours of my life I'll never get back." The story was weak, the acting was atrocious, almost as if they knew they attached themselves to a high profile bomb. It was, without a doubt, one of the worst movies. Recommend it only to those you hate most.
  • Matt Cyganik16 March 2003
    1/10
    What in the hell is this?
    I saw this movie awhile back on TBS while on vacation. The stupid 'cable' TV at the hotel only had like 6 channels, so i got stuck watching this. Having no clue what it was, only seeing Bill Cosby show up, and starte watching halfway through.

    At the end of the movie, I found myself asking, 'What the holy hell was that piece of trash?' I like Bill Cosby as a comedian, but this was just trash. It stank so hard, even TBS should've stayed away from it. And that's saying something.
  • Jackson Booth-Millard31 July 2015
    1/10
    Leonard Part 6
    Warning: Spoilers
    I had always heard about this film for the leading star, who I knew from The Cosby Show, and I knew it is considered one of the worst films ever made, I had to know why, from Razzie nominated director Paul Weiland (Mr. Bean, City Slickers: The Legend of Curly's Gold, Blackadder: Back and Forth, Made of Honour). Basically Leonard Parker (Razzie winning Bill Cosby) is a former CIA spy who quit the agency following the separation from his wife Allison Parker (Dallas's Pat Colbert) seven years ago, she refuses to speak with him, and his daughter Joan (Dumb and Dumber's Victoria Rowell) is dating a much older man, Leonard is now a restaurateur. The government call Leonard in to be re-recruited for a mission to save the world, many normally friendly animals have been taken captive and hypnotised to becoming killing machines, they have been brainwashed by evil vegetarian Medusa Johnson (Razzie nominated Gloria Foster) who wants to take over the world. While preparing to face Medusa and her army of warped animals and vegetarians, whose only weakness is raw meat, including getting some gadgets and information from his boss Nick Snyderburn (Joe Don Baker), Leonard makes an effort to try and reconnect with his wife over dinner. Leonard is armoured with his special secret agent suit and ready to face the villains, in the end he defeats the many vegetarians, frees the animals and his kidnapped wife, destroys the mind controlling machine, Medusa is defeated and Leonard is finally able to reunite with his wife and get away from the spy world. Also starring Tom Courtenay as Frayn, Moses Gunn as Giorgio Francozzi, David Maier as Man Ray, Grace Zabriskie as Jefferson and Jane Fonda makes a cameo in a spoof of one of her exercise videos. I should add, the title refers to the idea that this is the sixth instalment to a series of films featuring the adventures of Leonard, with the other five parts hidden away for security purposes, and also, when I watched this, it was while Cosby was being accused of sexual assault by various women. Cosby is daft as the secret agent with stupid abilities and skills, and Foster is rather ridiculous as the power-hungry herbivorous bitch, the problem is not just that the film is full of ridiculous moments that are apparently meant to make you laugh, like infiltrating a building while dancing ballet, and escaping an exploding building on an ostrich, the story both ludicrous and boring James Bond, it's just an unfunny and unwatchable comedy. It won the Razzies for Worst Picture and Worst Screenplay, and it was nominated for Worst 'Comedy' of Our First 25 Years. Poor!
  • tgroner10 September 1999
    4/10
    Yeah, it's bad, but it _knows_ it's bad. Just relax and laugh.
    What other movie has Bill Cosby riding an ostrich? Hm? Give this a chance sometime when you are braindead and want a chuckle. Don't watch it alone; it benefits most from heavy mockery. MST3K should have a crack at this. Don't take it seriously.
  • culwin24 November 1998
    4/10
    Ok, this movie sucks but...
    I don't really need to say how much this movie sucks, but to be honest there are a few truly hilarious moments. The frog scene made me laugh harder than I ever have in my life, and the Cos's gadgets and the scene where he "breaks in" to the bad guy's fortress were hilarious. Too bad the rest of the movie is so putrid.
  • RoseNylan20 February 2009
    1/10
    Yes, It Is That Bad.
    There are very few movies I've seen which have actually been physically painful to watch. This is one of them. Bill Cosby plays a secret agent brought out of retirement to save the world from an evil villainess who plans to take over by unleashing trained animals of almost every type, including fish and lobsters.

    From the minute this movie started, you could tell this would be the worst movie you've ever seen. There is a good 20 minutes of this film wasted on Cosby getting ready for a date, exercising, showing in Perrier and picking out ties in anticipation for the date, which had absolutely nothing to do with the plot and didn't even work as humor. There is another scene where Cosby is shocked that his daughter is dating a 66 year old man? What does Cosby do? He asks his daughter to get him a coke and proceeds to hold it in front of the camera conspicuously, making sure that the audience knows that he is drinking "Coke". Simply pathetic.

    I feel real sorry for that ostrich who unwillingly had to show his face in this atrocious film. There is nothing of any redeeming value in this steaming pile of pony loaf. Except when the guy's head exploded. That was funny!
  • Jay-20223 June 1999
    1/10
    Painful to Watch
    I don't know if it would be possible to make a worse movie. I'm actually ashamed to say that I've seen it. I wish I could give it a 0 out of 10!!!
  • BlaineD21 October 1998
    1/10
    Only one good thing about the movie
    I had a college friend who had the "honor" of being in this film as the "Girl in Bikini." In spite of all the bad reviews, I had to see the film to see her. Well, it turns out that they didn't even use her voice in the scenes; they dubbed her dialog and her screaming.

    Apart from getting to see her in the movie, there was nothing at all that would make this a worthwhile film to ever watch again. Fortunately her scene is the first one, so I don't even have to fast-forward or rewind much to see her. :-)

    I'd rate this film a 0.
  • bbrasher126 March 2001
    1/10
    THE WORST COMEDY EVER
    UNBELIEVABLE!

    After 15 years JOHNNY DANGEROUSLY has been knocked off the #1 spot on my list of all time worst comedies. I decided to check out LEONARD PART 6 for myself just to see if it was really as bad as they said it was.

    IT WAS WORSE!

    From the opening scene with the killer rainbow trout it never lets up. I can't for the life of me figure out what possessed one of the greatest comedians of our time to turn out something so devoid of laughs and creativity. As a comedy, as a spy movie, as an action flick, as a parody of all of the above, it fails miserably.

    At least JOHNNY DANGEROUSLY could squeeze out a couple of feeble laughs.

    LEONARD PART 6 has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

    Rating: 0 out of *****
  • AL01-32 June 2000
    Terrible
    No all-time worst movie list is complete without this film. There's absolutely nothing to like about it and no reason to watch it unless you want to see how NOT to make a film. Life it to short to spend it wasting time on this picture. It's debatable whether this movie or Ghost Dad is Cosby's worst film. Avoid both of them.
  • Qfan15 October 1999
    1/10
    A traumatic childhood memory...
    When I heard this movie was going to be released, I was thrilled!! As an 8-year-old, Dr Huxtable was a hero to me, the only doctor I actually admired. Then I saw this... I cried... I knew it was bad movie even then, and I thought Cosby's career was doomed. The movie's finale -- a bizarre pseudo-sexual moment that sees Cosby clubs his ex with various foodstuffs -- is still tormenting my dreams today. THIS MOVIE MAY HURT CHILDREN!!!!
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.