The New York Times' Scores

For 20,311 reviews, this publication has graded:
  • 46% higher than the average critic
  • 5% same as the average critic
  • 49% lower than the average critic
On average, this publication grades 4.2 points lower than other critics. (0-100 point scale)
Average Movie review score: 61
Highest review score: 100 Short Cuts
Lowest review score: 0 Gummo
Score distribution:
20311 movie reviews
  1. So preoccupied with delivering its effects that it doesn't bother to make sense of its story.
  2. Makes no psychological sense. Even within the convoluted realm of film noir, the development of the relationships defies any logic.
  3. Tacky and disposable.
  4. Offers a view of pornography that is nonjudgmental, even celebratory, but at the same time its premise -- that Danielle must be rescued from the shame and degradation of her old job -- suggests a more traditional, disapproving point of view. Instead of addressing this contradiction, the movie is happy to wallow in it, which would be fine if it had any real pleasure to offer.
  5. A lumpy three-and-a-half-hour glob of Civil War history.
  6. At least it isn't a remake -- though given how slovenly and forced this movie is, maybe that wouldn't have been such a bad idea.
  7. Its lack of subtlety is clearly a point of pride, and Mr. Hensleigh's flat-footed, hard-punching style has a blunt ferocity that makes "Kill Bill" look like "In the Bedroom."
  8. The picture, which fails to achieve its ambitions or to fulfill our expectations, is ultimately worse than a violent piece of hack work, in which the director isn't interested in displaying his integrity -- or taste. You'd be better off downloading the trailer: a much more convincing piece of storytelling.
  9. A piece of moldy wax fruit if ever there was one.
  10. As flimsy and manipulative as the shallowest Hollywood fantasy.
  11. Goldie Hawn and Steve Martin are appealing performers, but none of the energy, professionalism and gameness they display -- can surmount the mess that surrounds them in this misguided comedy.
  12. Squandered in foolish horseplay and on a story that zigzags so far out of control that it feels as if the screenwriter, Steve Adams, pasted together a bunch of zany notions in a frantic search for confusion.
  13. The spectacle of two mature stars forced to grovel in the bathroom for cheap laughs is pathetic.
  14. Mr. Allen's work is compromised by an apparent inability to match his shots in a spatially coherent fashion. It's never easy to tell who is chasing whom and in which direction, a needless confusion that dampens many of the thrills and scuttles quite a few gags.
  15. Ridiculous without being awful enough to be hilarious.
  16. A cringing romance that Mr. Vinterberg tries and fails to spin into a political allegory.
  17. The unfortunate thing is that children will probably waste their summers indoors watching "Recess" over and over again.
  18. Many of the faces that emerge through the murk appear bug-eyed. And much of the dialogue, which is frequently shouted, is only semi-intelligible.
  19. The risible dialogue, the bulging eyeballs, the heaving bosoms, the digitally rendered hyenas and squirming maggots, the movie fails to achieve the status of the instant camp classic. That's partly because the vibe of the film is too torpid.
  20. The screenplay is closer in tone to an uneasy mixture of post-"Seinfeld" bile and unfocused Altmanesque satirical misanthropy. Partly because the story's structure is so haphazard, most of the jokes land with a thud.
  21. An unholy, incoherent mess.
  22. Credibility, of course, wouldn't matter if the gags were good enough, which they are not. The film quickly falls back on the gross-out jokes that have made recent American comedies such a challenge to the digestive tract.
  23. Mr. Girod is a fish out of water in the after-hours clubs and deserted industrial districts that constitute the sexual underworld of Brussels. His film feels more like what one would see from the top of a double-decker tourist bus than the work of someone who has immersed himself in a sexual subculture and its particular values.
  24. They play cotton candy effigies of themselves named Kelly and Justin, and the best that can be said is that they don't embarrass themselves.
  25. Proves to be both too much and not enough: yet another slick, empty package of ersatz entertainment.
  26. A series of gun battles follow, none staged with quite enough verve or imagination to break through the pervasive torpor.
  27. Disturbingly superficial in its approach to the material.
  28. For much of the movie, the kinetic furor of the game sequences helps camouflage the weaknesses of a screenplay that is a mechanically contrived series of power struggles.
  29. Quickly curdles into a nasty variation of the one-last-score genre.
  30. The movie has a frantic staccato style that is more game-oriented than cinematic.

Top Trailers