What popular internet site known for its aggregated rating was criticized by a film critic as the internet's revenge on individual expression?
"the most disgusting movie I have ever seen."" Author and film critic Leonard Maltin awarded the film one and a half out of a possible four stars. In his review on the film, Maltin called the film ""cheap"", and ""[a] repellent but admittedly powerful and (for better or worse) influential horror shocker."" The film was nominated for AFI's 100 Years...100 Thrills. The film has a 61% approval rating on the internet review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, based on 36 reviews. Though the film passed with an R-rating by the Motion Picture Association of America, director Craven claimed that on several occasions,"
"took place on the adult website Pornhub. ""Movie 43"" was critically panned. Some critics considered it to be one of the worst films ever made. The film received an average score of 18 out of 100 on Metacritic, signifying ""overwhelming dislike"". Rotten Tomatoes gave it 4% rating based on reviews from 83 critics, with an average rating of 2.2/10, and the site's consensus states: ""A star-studded turkey, ""Movie 43"" is loaded with gleefully offensive and often scatological gags, but it's largely bereft of laughs."" Audiences surveyed by CinemaScore gave the film a D rating. Brian Gibson (""Vue Weekly"") describes ""Movie"
"White, such websites ""offer consensus as a substitute for assessment"". Director and producer Brett Ratner has criticized the website for ""reducing hundreds of reviews culled from print and online sources into a popularized aggregate score"", and feels it is the ""worst thing that we have in today's movie culture"". Writer Max Landis, following his film ""Victor Frankenstein"" receiving an approval rating of 24% on the site, wrote that the site ""breaks down entire reviews into just the word 'yes' or 'no', making criticism binary in a destructive arbitrary way"". American director Martin Scorsese wrote a column in ""The Hollywood Reporter"""
"of critics who reviewed the film, receiving a low 23% rotten rating over at Rotten Tomatoes. Internet debate soon erupted over the film's lowbrow treatment of independent film classics and caused backlash from die-hard independent film fans. Chris Parry, entertainment journalist and film critic for efilmcritic.com, found that the movie targeted films that were too well liked by its intended audience, and a larger (more mainstream) audience wouldn't recognize the referenced films. Controversy over the film ensued after the producer's former publication ""Filmthreat"" (who co-produced the film) gave the movie a perfect 5 star review. In light of the controversy"
"“Moviegoers love trailers. They pay attention to the TV spots. But Rotten Tomatoes is like the truth serum on the entire [promotional] campaign: are all the things you're telling me about the movie true or not?"". In January 2010, on the occasion of the 75th anniversary of the New York Film Critics Circle, its chairman Armond White cited Rotten Tomatoes in particular and film review aggregators in general as examples of how ""the Internet takes revenge on individual expression"". He said they work by ""dumping reviewers onto one website and assigning spurious percentage-enthusiasm points to the discrete reviews"". According to"
"game can be review bombed with low ratings to damage its reputation. In the same respect, a game can be given multiple 10 ratings by throwaway accounts to make it appear more popular than it actually is. Signal Studios president and creative director Douglas Albright described the website as having ""no standards"". Metacritic lists over 9,000 films ranked by aggregate score on a Marcus rating scale. Metacritic Metacritic is a website that aggregates reviews of media products: films, TV shows, music albums, video games, and formerly, books. For each product, the scores from each review are averaged (a weighted average)."
"""BlogCritics Magazine"", Rotten Tomatoes, and Yelp. According to A. O. Scott, chief film critic for ""The New York Times"", everyone on the Internet is a critic. Some critics like Roger Ebert achieve iconic status in pop culture and become well regarded. The American film critics Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel collaborated and appeared on television sometimes agreeing on their review of cinematographic works; sometimes they would differ. Film critics may use star classification to qualify the reviewed works. Characters depicting critics have been part of some movies, and have been represented in comedies, such as a food critic in the"
"the blog Film School Rejects, in which he contended that Flickchart would ""ruin your life."" ""Why will it ruin your life?"" asked Abaius. ""Because it’s going to take up all of your time, and all you’ll be doing is tearing your hair out and clicking"". Flickchart Flickchart is a Florida-based movie-ranking and social networking website. Launched in September 2009, Flickchart is the brainchild of web programmer Jeremy Thompson and web designer Nathan Chase. The impetus behind the site's creation came from an argument over the placement of ""Pulp Fiction"" and ""The Empire Strikes Back"" on the Internet Movie Database Top"
"by whistles and jeers."" Afterwards, Woodward faced a hostile press conference in which he was bombarded with questions about his inclusion as a character in the film. Rita Kempley of the ""Post"" also reported that the Cannes reception ""recalled a hive of John Belushi's killer bees."" The critical response to ""Wired"" was almost uniformly hostile. ""Wired"" has an overall approval rating of 4% on Rotten Tomatoes based on 26 reviews. Leonard Maltin condemned the movie as ""the film fiasco of its year"" and ""mind-numbingly wrongheaded."" Maltin noted that Michael Chiklis ""looks a little like Belushi but conveys none of his"
"FilmCrave, Flickchart and Everyone's a Critic. Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic aggregate both scores from accredited critics and those submitted by users. On these online review sites, users generally only have to register with the site in order to submit reviews. This means that they are a form of open access poll, and have the same advantages and disadvantages; notably, there is no guarantee that they will be a representative sample of the film's audience. In some cases, online review sites have produced wildly differing results to scientific polling of audiences. The emerging big data science has enabled computing to understand"
"on 15 critics, indicating ""generally unfavorable reviews"". Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of ""D–"" on an A+ to F scale, while PostTrak reported filmgoers gave it an ""awful"" 38% positive score; social media monitor RelishMix noted that ""the majority's feeling toward [the] film"" was negative. David Ehrlich of IndieWire gave the film a D, writing ""a tasteless and inedibly undercooked serving of the Internet's stalest creepypasta, ""Slender Man"" aspires to be for the YouTube era what ""The Ring"" was to the last gasps of the VHS generation. But... there's one fundamental difference that sets the"
"aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported an approval rating of 29% based on 167 reviews, with an average rating of 4.5/10. The website's critical consensus reads, ""Though arguably superior to its predecessor, ""G.I. Joe: Retaliation"" is overwhelmed by its nonstop action and too nonsensical and vapid to leave a lasting impression."" At Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average rating to reviews, the film has an average score of 41 out of 100, based on 31 critics, indicating ""mixed or average reviews"". Alan Scherstuhl of ""The Village Voice"" wrote in a positive review that ""this [movie] pushes right past ""competent"" into ""mostly"
"was panned by critics and fans of the animated series. The review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a 5% approval rating based on 188 reviews with an average rating of 2.8/10, making it the lowest-rated film ever produced by Nickelodeon Movies, and Shyamalan's worst-reviewed film to date. The critics' consensus reads, """"The Last Airbender"" squanders its popular source material with incomprehensible plotting, horrible acting, and detached joyless direction."" On Metacritic which gives a weighted average score based on reviews from the top mainstream critics, it has an average score of 20 out of 100, based on 33 reviews,"
"Blu-ray. ""The Times-Picayune"" reported, ""'America' wasn't widely screened for critics, but the first handful of reviews are... not particularly glowing,"" saying that the reviews essentially labeled the film as ""partisan"". ""The News-Press"" reported, ""'America' has been criticized by some as offensive, right-wing propaganda."" The film review website Metacritic surveyed and assessed 10 reviews as negative and 1 as mixed, with none being positive. It gave an aggregate score of 15 out of 100, which indicates ""overwhelming dislike"". The similar website Rotten Tomatoes surveyed and, categorizing the reviews as positive or negative, assessed 22 as negative and 2 as positive. Of"
"Metacritic Metacritic is a website that aggregates reviews of media products: films, TV shows, music albums, video games, and formerly, books. For each product, the scores from each review are averaged (a weighted average). Metacritic was created by Jason Dietz, Marc Doyle, and Julie Doyle Roberts in 1999. The site provides an excerpt from each review and hyperlinks to its source. A color of green, yellow or red summarizes the critics' recommendations. It has been described as the video game industry's ""premier"" review aggregator. Metacritic's scoring converts each review into a percentage, either mathematically from the mark given, or which"
"companies have found threatening. For instance, the scores are regularly posted in Google search results for films so reviewed. Furthermore, the scores are prominently featured in Fandango's popular ticket purchasing website and its mobile app, Flixster. This led to complaints that the scores, especially ""rotten"" ones, are prone to affect the purchasing decisions of the public, such as saying in no-so-many words ""You are an idiot if you pay to see this movie"". Others have argued that filmmakers and studios have only themselves to blame if Rotten Tomatoes produces a bad score, as this only reflects a poor reception among"
"""Film 2003"" as ""the worst movie of all time"". The British film magazine ""Empire"" reduced their rating of the film from the maximum five stars and an enthusiastic review, to four stars with a less positive review in a later edition, to accommodate its readers' tastes, who wanted to disassociate themselves from the hype surrounding the film, and the reported activities of its fans, such as those attending multiple screenings. In addition to this, positive and negative parodies and other such spoofs of the film abounded and were circulated on the internet, often inspiring passionate responses from fans of various"
"was panned by critics. On Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 1% based on 73 reviews with an average rating of 1.8/10. The site's critical consensus reads, ""Returning to their seemingly bottomless well of flatulence humor, racial stereotypes, and stale pop culture gags, Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer have produced what is arguably their worst ""Movie"" yet."" On Metacritic, the film has a score of 15 out of 100 based on reviews from 12 critics, indicating ""overwhelming dislike"". Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film a grade of ""F"" on an A+ to F scale. It was"
"some towns and excoriated on the Internet"". The right-wing newspaper ""Gazeta Polska"" described the film as ""mendacious and harmful for Poles"". ""Wprost"", one of Poland's largest weekly, ran a cover with Stuhr's image framed in a Jewish star, accompanied by the headline, ""Maciej Stuhr—Was He Lynched at His Own Request?"" The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported a 79% approval rating with an average rating of 7.2/10 based on 29 reviews. As of April 2, 2014, Metacritic gives the film a weighted average score of 62/100, based on 12 reviews, indicating ""generally favorable reviews"", with no user reviews at this"
"You Drop"" panned the movie as it felt that it ""lacks true scares, awesome kills or even the routine flash of nudity to warrant any sort of viewing. It panders a silly and over exaggerated message of the dangers of the anonymity of the internet and the “nature” of people. It uses a silly plot to carry a ridiculous camera technique and delivers nothing but angst and irritation."" ""Fangoria"" criticized the film for many of the same reasons, as it felt that the movie began on a strong note but became ""inauthentic and irritating"" after the film depicted ""Almost everyone,"
"release in the United States, pirated DVD copies of a rough cut of the film surfaced among street vendors. Director Eli Roth blamed the piracy for the film's lower-than-anticipated box office results. In a 2007 article, the New Zealand publication ""Newshub"" stated that ""Hostel: Part II"" was the most-pirated film of all time, having been illegally downloaded on the Internet by millions of users. Internet review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes shows the film has a 44% approval rating based on 110 reviews; the average rating is 5/10. The site's consensus states: ""Offering up more of the familiar sadism and gore,"
"Reception of the film was mixed to negative, according to Rotten Tomatoes, which gave the film a 34% score. Aggregate website Metacritic gave the film a Metascore of 45, indicating average or mixed reviews, and a user score of 7.7 indicating positive audience response. A major criticism of the film was that it was unintentionally funny and led to ""prison cliches"". Jamie Russell of the BBC wrote, ""[I]t keeps its tongue welded firmly in its cheek. The scriptwriters have enough sense to replay every funny moment from the original, while also adding a couple of innovations of their own. The"
"seen as potentially offensive to American audiences. The expression 51st state, in this context, refers to US dominance over Britain. On review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes, the film received a 25% based on reviews from 102 critics, with an average rating of 4.3/10, and the consensus reading: ""Filled with profanities, ""Formula 51"" is a stylized and incoherent mess that doesn't add up to much."" On Metacritic, the film gained a 23 out of 100 based on reviews from 29 critics. Roger Ebert of the ""Chicago Sun-Times"" newspaper called the film ""a farce"", giving the film one out of four stars,"
"you."" In response to the critical drubbing his 2010 film ""Cop Out"" received, Smith lashed out at the community of film critics on his Twitter account saying, ""Writing a nasty review for ""Cop Out"" is akin to bullying a retarded kid. All you’ve done is make fun of something that wasn't doing you any harm and wanted only to give some cats some fun laughs."" Smith also implied on Twitter that he may charge critics for advance screenings of his films, a service which has typically been provided free; this subsequently ignited a strong response from some critics condemning his"
"listing for the CD release The film received generally negative reviews from critics. Review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes gave the film a score of 15% based on 27 reviews, with the site's critical consensus stating, ""Dull, poorly directed, and badly miscast, ""Red Sonja"" is an uninspired conclusion to Schwarzenegger's barbarian trilogy."" Schwarzenegger commented, ""It's the worst film I have ever made."" He joked, ""Now, when my kids get out of line, they're sent to their room and forced to watch ""Red Sonja"" ten times. I never have too much trouble with them."" John Grant, who authored the film's entry in"
"censored, had a twenty-second review which consisted of Korey Coleman staring blankly into the camera before uttering, ""Fuck you"" (which is the lowest rating the website gives) uncensored. In the audio commentary from the site, Coleman stated, ""The films that these two directors make are so blatant at being nothing more than a juvenile finger pointing at an image or mention of a popular trend that, to me, they seem exploitive of a young culture raised to have an ever-decreasing attention span, thanks to the Internet and channel surfing and, this may sound a little crazy, but, I think it"
"massively popular IAmA subreddit, where notable people engage in Q&A sessions with the Reddit community. Redditors were disappointed by his answers and his apparent misunderstanding of the format, with some vowing to ""boycott the flick"". CNET characterized one of Harrelson's responses as ""sheer oozing, all-about-me-ism"". Josh Feldman with MediaIte shared the following perspective: ""a proxy for the actor basically gave vague answers to half of the questions and in-no-way subtle plugs for his upcoming movie Rampart to the other half. It was a public relations nightmare, and while it certainly raised awareness about the movie, it definitely backfired."" Feldman went"
"Everyone's a Critic Everyone's a Critic (EaC) was a film community website. It began as an experiment utilizing a collaborative filtering algorithm to obtain film recommendations from people who share similar tastes in film. Over time, this recommendation system website has grown into an internet community of cinephiles, critics and reviewers. In 2002 Dan Seidner, a software developer from suburban Philadelphia, created a website where people could get film recommendations from other people who share their tastes in movies. Site members (hereforth referred to as critics) grade movies and get a list of all other critics from the site, in"
"a parody?"" IGN also gave the movie a critical review, writing that a ""great comedic opportunity was wasted on cheap one-dimensional gags and boring sex jokes."" In contrast DVD Verdict was more favorable, commenting that the movie was ""first and foremost a goodbye gift to fans of the series and they should have no problem enjoying the myriad references and in-jokes scattered about, as well as all of the crude humor."" The film was criticised for its antisemitism, even though the producers said that ""it was supposed to make fun of bigotry"". The Drawn Together Movie: The Movie! The Drawn"
"the ratings, grades or stars each reviewer gives a movie, and assigning a grade to those reviews which do not include a numerical value. The site also weighted each review based on the circulation the review received. Other websites use different criteria to measure reviews; for example, the aggregator Metacritic weights reviews based on the ""prestige"" of a reviewer, while Rotten Tomatoes does not assign weight to its ratings based on the reviewers. Movie Review Intelligence discontinued publishing its popular aggregation website at the end of April 2013. David Gross said in a statement. ""We are an independent website. As"
"later that year on October 6, 2010. Common Sense Media, a site that reviews the content of movies for parents, panned the movie and gave it one star, criticizing its vulgarity, stating that the film is ""filled to the brim with lewd sexual acts, language, and violence. The cartoon parody is meant to push the boundaries of taste, but amidst violence against women, the violation of corpses, kids asking to be sexually abused, heads blown off at close range, the drinking of baby blood ... who -- and especially what child -- is going to be thinking of this as"
"humorous Twitter account WeRateDogs. Rating sites have a social feedback effect; many high school principals and administrators, for example, have begun to regularly monitor the status of their teaching staff via student controlled ""rating sites"". Some looks-based sites have come under criticism for promoting vanity and self-consciousness. Some claim they potentially expose users to sexual predators. Most rating sites suffer from similar self-selection bias since only highly motivated individuals devote their time to completing these rankings, and not a fair sampling of the population. Additionally, individuals can post multiple comments, thereby skewing the ranking. Below is a sampling of rating"
"violence and quips to spare, but its chaotically hollow action adds up to another missed opportunity for a franchise increasingly defined by disappointment."" On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 48 out of 100, based on 49 critics, indicating ""mixed or average reviews"". Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of ""C+"" on an A+ to F scale, those on PostTrak gave it a 66% positive score and a 55% ""definite recommend"", and social media monitor RelishMix noted there were ""mixed reactions"" about the film online. Writing for ""The Hollywood Reporter"", Jordan Mintzer called"