The New Yorker's Scores
- Movies
- TV
For 3,482 reviews, this publication has graded:
-
37% higher than the average critic
-
2% same as the average critic
-
61% lower than the average critic
On average, this publication grades 1 point higher than other critics.
(0-100 point scale)
Average Movie review score: 66
| Highest review score: | Fiume o morte! | |
|---|---|---|
| Lowest review score: | Bio-Dome |
Score distribution:
-
Positive: 1,940 out of 3482
-
Mixed: 1,344 out of 3482
-
Negative: 198 out of 3482
3482
movie
reviews
- By Date
- By Critic Score
-
-
Reviewed by
David Denby
In serious roles, Weisz can be stiff-backed and righteous, but here, doing comedy, she appears to be a major actress eager to reveal everything she’s been holding inside.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Working out of themselves (as his actors do), they can't create characters. Their performances don't have enough range, so we tend to tire of them before the movie is finished. Still, a lot of people found this psychodrama agonizingly true and beautiful.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
Although the plot comes to rely on a particularly outlandish series of coincidences, it’s a credit to Kloves’s skill that you can almost put this out of your mind and enjoy his long, suspended scenes, brimming with lust or the need to lash out.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Richard Brody
The vigorous cast enlivens the conventional action, and brilliant comedic sallies by Awkwafina, as Rachel’s college friend, and Nico Santos, as Nick’s cousin, knock it for a loop.- The New Yorker
- Posted Aug 13, 2018
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Richard Brody
The sculptural physicality of the images, a 3-D explosion without glasses, embodies that violence while preserving the antagonists’ innocent grace; love smooths things out to a dreamy and reflective shine.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Richard Brody
Lapid’s sense of form is more modest than his impulses; his direction falls short of Mercier’s clenched intensity and unhinged energy.- The New Yorker
- Posted Oct 24, 2019
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
What the novels leave us with, and what emerges more fitfully from this film, as if in shafts of sunlight, is the growing realization that, although our existence is indisputably safer, softer, cleaner, and more dependable than the lives led by Captain Aubrey and his men, theirs were in some immeasurable way better. [17 November 2003, p. 172]- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
David Denby
Even though we can see it coming, this gruff, inarticulate, half-embarrassed love between men, arrived at after many setbacks, is one of the stories that action movies never tire of telling and that many of us, even though we may laugh it off the next day, still find moving. [17 & 24 June 2002, p. 176]- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Richard Brody
The no-holds-barred, extravagantly playful methods by which Audley and Birney conjure the audacious yet coherent tale of supernatural menaces and splendors are the movie’s prime achievement.- The New Yorker
- Posted Feb 17, 2022
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
Precisely thirty-six times more interesting than “The Girl on the Train.” Where the conceit of that movie feels timid, cooked up, and culturally thin, Anvari’s is nourished by a near-traumatic sense of history, and, in terms of feminist pluck, Rashidi’s presence, in the leading role, is both gutsier and more plausible than the combined efforts of all the main performers in Taylor’s film.- The New Yorker
- Posted Oct 10, 2016
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The movie doesn't find a way to give us the emotional texture of the interrelationships and dependencies in the book (one can probably enjoy the film much more if one knows the book) but the principal actors (Marlon Brando, Brian Keith, Elizabeth Taylor, Julie Harris) were able to do some startling things with their roles.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Whatever one's reservations about this famous film, it is impressive, and in the love scene between Taylor and Clift, physical desire seems palpable.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
Even as this fine documentary unveils the "mystery woman," as she once described herself, it remains intent on the molding of her myth. [31 March 2014, p.80]- The New Yorker
Posted Mar 27, 2014 -
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
A pedagogical tone, reminiscent of the 30s, is maintained throughout much of the movie: these strikers are always teaching each other little constructive lessons, and their dialogue is blown up to the rank of folk wisdom.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
This is not life imitating art. This is art going to bed with life and staying there for the rest of the afternoon. [31 March 2014, p.81]- The New Yorker
Posted Mar 27, 2014 -
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Often underrated, Jerry Schatzberg can make viewers feel the beauty and excitement of everyday grit.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
There are agreeable overtones of Mark Twain tall tales in this good-humored, though uneven, version of the paradoxical life of Judge Roy Bean, with Walter Brennan in the part.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
To my eyes, the whole thing past in a blur of fabulous collage. [2 September 2002, p. 152]- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Richard Brody
Without sacrificing his critical judgment, Schrader retains a remarkable sympathy both for Hearst and for those who wrenched her from her life and made her—even if in deed only—one of their own.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
- Critic Score
Duvall and Jones wear their roles like broken-in work clothes, and the screenplay has a drawling Southern rhythm that's very pleasing.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
Mystery buffs will see a twist coming from afar, and connoisseurs of horror will be underscared, yet the film sits squarely in the Ricci canon. Once again, she leaves us wondering: Is her character the victim of menace and disorientation, or could she herself be the wellspring of strangeness?- The New Yorker
- Posted May 10, 2022
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Miss Crawford's heavy breathing was certified as acting when she won an Academy Award for her performance here.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
Though Cumberbatch, too, can be compelling, and though you constantly wonder what is stored in reserve behind his wintry gaze, he is at heart a master of urbanity, and not everyone will be convinced that he’s truly at home on the range. Still, you should certainly seek out the movie, and relish its central standoff.- The New Yorker
- Posted Nov 22, 2021
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
Yet the movie persuades you, and bears you along. It may lack historical grounding—though Mary and Charlotte were certainly friends, the existence of any further intensity is pure, indeed wild, supposition—but it feels emotionally earthed, and, far from rising above the spartan brutishness of the early scenes, Lee digs deeper still.- The New Yorker
- Posted Nov 9, 2020
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
- Critic Score
It's a pretty shameless outlaw fantasy; the feminist justification that the script provides for the heroines' behavior doesn't make their actions any less preposterous.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
The Darjeeling Limited works best when the level of artifice is at its highest and most overt.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
There is no narrator; rather, we are invited to eavesdrop on--or to get an earful from--such figures as Hassan Ibrahim, a jovial reporter with Al Jazeera, and Samir Khader, one of the network’s senior producers. [24 May 2004, p. 97]- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Richard Brody
What’s concrete in the film are its bluff and energetic performances. Tomei is, as ever, a wonder of passion and imagination. Burr is a dynamo of roaring invention. And, above all, Davidson himself, with his blend of blank comedic aggression and bare-nerve vulnerability, provides the film with an emotional complexity that surpasses the bare storytelling.- The New Yorker
- Posted Jul 7, 2020
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Anthony Lane
And is Law the right fit for such a role? Whereas Hugh Grant, another fine young dandy of yore, has been rejuvenated by the creases of middle age, Law, I regret to say, looks glum and soured. The problem, for The Nest, is that the sourness is present from the start; he never gives off the bounce and the thrust that Rory is rumored to possess.- The New Yorker
- Posted Nov 9, 2020
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
David Denby
The movie version of the hit Broadway musical Hairspray is perfectly pleasant--I smiled to myself all the way through it--but it’s not as exhilarating as the show.- The New Yorker
- Read full review
-
Reviewed by