The film got mixed reviews from the newspaper critics.
Anker Kirkeby of Politiken, spending just four lines on the film, does not even consider it a film but "merely a series of picture postcards." "Where was the bridge’s architecture, its life and functions?" he asks rhetorically. Erik Ulrichsen in National Tidende calls the film "barrenly formalistic" and says he was sorely bored.
The critic for Information thinks the film has many indifferent and poor shots and considers it a failure. Jens Kistrup in Berlingske Tidende describes the film as "lovely but dead culture cinema."
Kristelig Dagblad, on the other hand, likes the film, singling out its beautiful shots, while the critic for Land og Folk is the only one who has an eye for the qualities of the film’s poetic expression: "It is exactly so short that you don’t have time to tire of the film’s rather demanding form, and you keep a refreshing memory of it."
By Lisbeth Richter Larsen | 03. June