Chicago Reader's Scores
- Movies
For 6,312 reviews, this publication has graded:
-
42% higher than the average critic
-
2% same as the average critic
-
56% lower than the average critic
On average, this publication grades 4.9 points lower than other critics.
(0-100 point scale)
Average Movie review score: 60
| Highest review score: | I Stand Alone | |
|---|---|---|
| Lowest review score: | Old Dogs |
Score distribution:
-
Positive: 2,983 out of 6312
-
Mixed: 2,456 out of 6312
-
Negative: 873 out of 6312
6312
movie
reviews
- By Date
- By Critic Score
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
William Friedkin's remake of the French thriller Wages of Fear represents an above-average effort by the director of The Exorcist—meaning it's marginally watchable. Friedkin senselessly complicates the simple story—four men drive a truckload of nitro through a South American jungle—with a lengthy exposition and some unfortunate existential overtones. The rhythms are all off—it's either too fast or too slow—but most of the set pieces are effective.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
J.R. Jones
Visconti rolls out some heavy left-wing proselytizing in the last half hour, but what really hits like a hammer is Lancaster’s realization that these awful people are the only family he’s got.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
The Walt Disney animators returned to top form with this beautifully crafted and wonderfully expressive cartoon feature, the first major work to come out of the Disney studios in a decade. There are limitations to Disney's naturalistic style, but for every failure of imagination there is a triumph of craftsmanship.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Ousmane Sembene’s 1977 Senegalese film was attacked for daring to depict life in precolonial Africa as something less than paradisiacal.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Proof positive of just how mediocre 70s mediocrity could be—any quasicompetent Hollywood hack of the 40s could have gone to town with this story, but under Yates's direction it merely lurches along, from one predictable danger to another.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Boorman deserves credit for trying out some new ideas, even if most of them backfire. Visually, it's fascinating—sort of a blend of Minnellian baroque and Buñuelian absurdity—but the dialogue is childish, the story is incomprehensible, and the metaphysics are ridiculous. Still, an audacious failure is preferable to a chickenhearted success. More than worth a look, if only out of curiosity.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
This 1958 film by Yasujiro Ozu (his first in color) is gentle, spare, and ultimately elusive, in a quietly satisfying way. [07 May 2009, p.28]- Chicago Reader
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
An exhilarating update of "Flash Gordon," very much in the same half-jokey, half-earnest mood, but backed by special effects that, for once, really work and are intelligently integrated with the story.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Demme is satirical but never cruel, and sweet but never syrupy: this film marked the emergence of one of the most appealing directorial personalities of the New Hollywood.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Visually and structurally it's a mess, but many of the situations are genuinely clever, and there are plenty of memorable gags. The perpetual problem is that Allen isn't nearly the thinker he thinks he is.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Three short films drawn from the Milne tales by the Disney studio, yoked together to make a feature in 1977. Their charm is undeniable, though it mainly resides in the source material: the late 60s, when these were made, were Disney's darkest days for craft and commitment.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Once again, violence (more than 30 on-screen deaths) makes a poor substitute for suspense, while sloppy, rear projection work drains most of the excitement from the climax.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
First-rate schlock; overlong and incredibly stupid, but that's part of the formula by now.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
The situation—a mother and daughter switch personalities for a day—is rife with possibilities, but since this 1977 comedy is a Disney film, said possibilities are scrupulously squandered...Not so bad as Disney goes, but it's better left to the kiddies and other forgiving types.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Bogdanovich is trying to do an interesting and commendable thing in dramatizing aesthetic passion; his failure is as noble as it is conspicuous.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
One of the most innovative, engaging, and insightful films of that turbulent era of American moviemaking.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Reducing one of the most compelling cultural icons of the century to a comic book character, this $22 million project makes a passable kiddie show, and not much else.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Ashby is excellent on atmosphere but fair to middling on character. When the film makes a sudden transition from epic to melodrama, things fall apart.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Jonathan Rosenbaum
Harold Pinter's cold and gnomic script seems partly to blame, as well as interfering producer Sam Spiegel; but if you forget that you're supposed to be seeing something meaningful or important, this is pretty watchable.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Brian De Palma demonstrates the drawbacks of a film-school education by overexploiting every cornball trick of style in the book: slow motion, split screen long takes, and soft focus abound, all to no real point...He's an overachiever—which might not make for good movies, but at least he's seldom dull.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Jonathan Rosenbaum
Good campy fun from the combined talents of Paddy Chayefsky and Sidney Lumet; Chayefsky was apparently serious about much of this shrill, self-important 1976 satire about television, interlaced with bile about radicals and pushy career women,- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Jonathan Rosenbaum
Critics seemed to like this less than audiences; personally I had a ball.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Jonathan Rosenbaum
Tarkovsky's eerie mystic parable is given substance by the filmmaker's boldly original grasp of film language and the remarkable performances by all the principals.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
As usual, blood flows freely and gratuitously, but you could do worse.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
-
Reviewed by
Jonathan Rosenbaum
There's nothing in the aesthetic and neo-Freudian delirium within hailing distance of Vertigo, and the plot's often more complicated than complex, but Herrmann's overpowering score and De Palma's endlessly circling camera movements do manage to cast a spell.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Dave Kehr
Almost an hour of self-indulgent psychedelics, it's nearly impossible to watch.- Chicago Reader
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by