The New Yorker's Scores

  • Movies
  • TV
For 3,481 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 1.1 points higher than other critics. (0-100 point scale)
Average Movie review score: 66
Highest review score: 100 Fiume o morte!
Lowest review score: 0 Bio-Dome
Score distribution:
3481 movie reviews
  1. It's a creditable though unadventurous film, handsomely staged in the M-G-M backlot style for classics.
    • The New Yorker
  2. A stirring 18-centry sea adventure...For the kind of big budget, studio controlled romantic adventure that this is, it's very well done.
    • The New Yorker
  3. This suave, amusing spy melodrama is directed with so sure a touch that the suspense is charged with wit; it's one of the three or four best things Hitchcock ever did.
    • The New Yorker
  4. Naive yet powerful.
    • The New Yorker
  5. A macabre comedy classic.
    • The New Yorker
  6. The best scenes--especially an assassination attempt at Royal Albert Hall--are stunning, but Hitchcock seems sloppily unconcerned about the unconvincing material in between the tricks and jokes.
    • The New Yorker
  7. Classic, compulsively watchable rags-to-riches-and-heartbreak weeper, from a novel by Fannie Hurst.
    • The New Yorker
  8. The plot is trivial French farce (about mistaken identities), but the dances are among the wittiest and the most lyrical expressions of American romanticism on the screen.
    • The New Yorker
  9. People hadn't seen anything like it; that doesn't mean they needed to.
    • The New Yorker
  10. It started a new cycle in screen entertainment by demonstrating that a murder mystery could also be a sophisticated screwball comedy.
    • The New Yorker
  11. No one has ever fully explained what gives this basically slight romantic comedy its particular - and enormous - charm.
    • The New Yorker
  12. The picture--which is almost surreally entertaining--is also famous for its madcap choreography; chorus girls dancing on the wings of planes, to the title song.
    • The New Yorker
  13. The film was lavishly produced, with great care given to the sets and costumes and makeup, but the spirit is missing.
    • The New Yorker
  14. A lovely, graceful film, and surprisingly faithful to the atmosphere, the Victorian sentiments, and the Victorian strengths of the Louisa May Alcott novel.
    • The New Yorker
  15. The Marx Brothers in their greatest movie.
    • The New Yorker
  16. A little poky but impressively well done, with witty special effects (by John P. Fulton) and traces of the Whale humor that enlivened his Old Dark House and The Bride of Frankenstein.
    • The New Yorker
  17. The first time you see this film, you're likely to find it silly, autoerotic, static, absurd, and you may feel cheated after having heard so much about it. But though it may seem to have no depth, you're not likely to forget it -- it has a suggestiveness unlike any other film.
    • The New Yorker
  18. It has some silly, yet irresistibly wonderful examples of Busby Berkeley's pinwheel choreography.
    • The New Yorker
  19. Great fun in the uninhibited early-30s style, made at M-G-M before fear of church pressure groups turned the studio respectable and pompous.
    • The New Yorker
  20. The self-conscious good taste of it all creaks, but Noel Coward knows plenty of tricks, and the performers know how to get the most out of his lines.
    • The New Yorker
  21. The backstage story is pleasantly tawdry and corny.
    • The New Yorker
  22. Harlow is intensely liable, delivering her zingy wisecracks with a wonderful dirty good humor, and Gable is at that early peak in his career when he is so sizzlingly sexual that it seems both funny and natural for the two women to be fighting over him.
    • The New Yorker
  23. Most of the players give impossibly bad performances—they chew up the camera. But if you want to see what screen glamour used to be, and what, originally, “stars” were, this is perhaps the best example of all time.
  24. The Marx Brothers in one of their niftiest corny-surreal comedies; it isn't in the class of their Duck Soup but then what else is?
    • The New Yorker
  25. Overall, it's a terrific movie, even though the pacing doesn't always seem quite right.
    • The New Yorker
  26. A true nightmare.
    • The New Yorker
  27. Irresistibly enjoyable.
    • The New Yorker
  28. The director, Rouben Mamoulian, rather overdoes the pseudo-science at the beginning, but at some levels this story seems to work in every version, and this one, set in a starched mid-Victorian environment, suggests the lust that has to come out--and the attraction of the gutter.
    • The New Yorker
  29. Probably the most famous of all horror films, and one of the best.
    • The New Yorker
  30. Heavenly, corny nonsense.
    • The New Yorker

Top Trailers