On
review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of 91% based on 164 reviews, with an average rating of 7.5/10. The website's critics consensus reads: "Well-acted and beautifully made,
The White Tiger distills the strengths of its source material into a grimly compelling drama." On
Metacritic, it has a weighted average score of 76 out of 100, based on 39 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".
Joe Morgenstern of
The Wall Street Journal called the film "funny and ferocious" and described it as "a zestful epic blessed with rapier wit, casually dazzling dialogue, gorgeous cinematography and, at the center of it all, a sensational star turn by [...] Adarsh Gourav". Rating the film 3.5 stars out of 4,
Michael Phillips of
Chicago Tribune termed the film a "propulsive adaptation", writing: "The cast brings an edge and a drive to the telling, while cinematographer Paolo Carrera captures both the real-life grit and the dreamy, aspirational glamour of Balram's unsentimental education." David Rooney of
The Hollywood Reporter wrote: "An immersive plunge into the chasm separating the servant class from the rich in contemporary India, the drama observes corruption at the highest and lowest levels with its tale of innocence lost and tables turned. If there's simply too much novelistic incident stuffed into the overlong film's Dickensian sprawl, the three leads' magnetic performances and the surprising twists of the story keep you engrossed."
The Timess
Kevin Maher rated the film four out of five stars, noting the film as "a dizzy, woozy, taxi ride to the dark side" and praised Chopra Jonas' performance, calling her "impressive".
Anna M. M. Vetticad of
Firstpost criticised the poor dialogue and “the erroneous assumption that caste has given way to class in modern India”, but appreciated the rewriting of Chopra Jonas’ character. She rated the film 2.5 out of 5 stars, and wrote: “Pandering to the Western viewer while fearful of the Hindutva mob - that is about as tricky as a tightrope walk can get, especially when the filmmaker's own understanding of India is evidently limited.”
Richard Lawson of
Vanity Fair praised the acting and Bahrani's direction and screenplay, saying that the film brings the celebrated novel to vivid life. In his four out of five stars review,
Robbie Collin of
The Telegraph wrote "a punchy, propulsive watch, blown along by snappy editing and a hip-hop-driven soundtrack that stresses that there's still much fun to be had when hefty themes of inequality and geopolitics are being tackled."
Bilge Ebiri of the
New York magazine called the film "a Brutal, Powerful Tale of Ambition, Class, and Corruption" that "cuts across borders and continents, and [...] cuts into the soul as well".
Peter Bradshaw of
The Guardian gave the film four stars out of five, describing as a "Balzac-worthy satire of submission and power" and wrote "Bahrani [adapts and] also directs with terrific storytelling energy." Clarisse Loughrey from
The Independent opined that the film was a "dark but exhilarating satire of capitalism".
Peter Travers of
ABC News praised the "throughout pitch perfect" acting and Bahrani's direction, writing "Ramin Bahrani keeps you on the edge of your seat."
Owen Gleiberman of
Variety opined that the film is "an ironic study of the psychology of servitude", praising the performances by Chopra Jonas and Gourav, whom he called "marvelous". David Ehrlich of
IndieWire gave the film a "B", calling it a "darkly comic thriller" and a "brutal corrective" to
Slumdog Millionaire (2008). K. Austin Collins from
Rolling Stone gave the film three out of five stars, writing that the film was a capable, compelling and topical drama but suffered "for giving us a setup that's richer than the follow-through." The critic praised Gourav's performances as "unassuming but pitch-perfect" and he felt that Rao and Chopra Jonas also gave equally worthy performances. In a mixed review,
A.O. Scott of
The New York Times deemed the film "a barbed rags-to-riches tale", and wrote: "The plot is lively, and the settings vividly captured by Bahrani and the director of photography, Paolo Carnera, but the characters don't quite come to life. They aren't trapped by prescribed social roles so much as by the programmatic design of the narrative, which insists it is showing things as they really are. If it wasn't so insistent, it might be more convincing." Jesse Hassenger of
The A.V. Club criticised the film for only "hitting the key themes and scenes without finding an independent tone", while also adding that the overtly explaining narration repeatedly takes the reins away from Gourav's acting.
Baradwaj Rangan of
Film Companion wrote: "Like in
99 Homes, Bahrani directs with an eye on narrative propulsion rather than subtlety — but Balram's psychological arc is gripping, and the film is compulsively watchable." == Awards and nominations ==