The New Yorker's Scores
- Movies
- TV
For 3,485 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: 1,941 out of 3485
-
Mixed: 1,346 out of 3485
-
Negative: 198 out of 3485
3485
movie
reviews
- By Date
- By Critic Score
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Whatever oddball charm and silliness the first Rocky had is long gone. Rocky III starts with the hyped climax of II and then just keeps going on that level; it's packaged hysteria. This picture is primitive, but it's also shrewd and empty and inept.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
There are lapses in the continuity, and the picture is pushed toward a ready-made, theatre-of-the-absurd melodrama--the kind of instant fantasy that filled One From the Heart.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The film is one continuous spurt of energy...But the picture is abstract in an adolescent way. Miller's attempt to tap into the universal concept of the hero (as enunciated by Jung and explicated by Joseph Campbell in "The Hero with a Thousand Faces") makes the film joyless.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Martin has a few good silly gags, but you may find yourself fighting to stay awake and losing.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
It's a mixture of style and chic hanky-panky, but it's genuinely sparkling.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The picture is a piece of technological lyricism held together by the glue of simpleminded heroic sentiment; basically, its appeal is in watching a couple of guys win their races.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The film is comatose; you're brought into it only by the camera tricks or the special-effects horrors, or, perhaps, the nude scenes.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
This spoofy black comedy is thin-textured and it's sedated; it doesn't have enough going on in it -- not even enough to look at. The nothingness of the movie is supposed to be its droll point, but viewers may experience sensory deprivation.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Edwards pulls laughs, though. He does it with the crudest setups and the moldiest, most cynical dumb jokes.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Costa-Gavras's antipathy to Americans appears to be so deep-seated that he can't create American characters. The only real filmmaking is in the backgrounds: in the anxious, ominous atmosphere of a city under martial law -- the sirens, the tanks, the helicopters, the feeling of abnormal silences and of random terror.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
A wonderful movie...It isn't remarkable visually, but features some of the best young actors in the country.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
This unapologetically grown-up movie about separating is perhaps the most revealing American movie of its era. Though the director, Alan Parker, doesn't do anything innovative in technique, it's a modern movie in terms of its consciousness.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The most spirited satisfying Western epic in several years--it may seem a little loose at first, but it gets better and better as it goes along and you get the fresh, crazy hang of it.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The director, Jean-Jacques Annaud, has his own primitivism: he doesn't seem to have discovered crosscutting yet. What's fun in the movie is the makeup, and the way that the faces of the three warriors are simian and yet attractive; the 60s have made the ape look seem hip.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Richardson is able to encompass so much in the widescreen frame that he shows how the whole corrupt mess works.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The dance numbers are funny, amazing, and beautiful all at once; several of them are just about perfection. And though some of the dialogue scenes are awkwardly paced and almost static, they still have a rapt, gripping quality.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The subject - the romantic life of an American Communist - may be daring, but the moviemaking is extremely traditional, with Beatty playing a man who dies for an ideal. It's rather a sad movie, because it isn't really very good.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Sydney Pollack's directing is efficient and the film is moderately entertaining, but it leaves no residue. Except for the intensity of Newman's sly, compact performance...and the marvelously inventive acting of Melinda Dillon.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The kind of uplifting twaddle that traffics heavily in rather basic symbols: the gold light on the pond stands for the sunset of life, and so on and so on...A doddering valentine.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Gilliam has a cacophonous imagination; even the magical incongruities are often cancelled out by the incessant buzz of cleverness. It's far from a bad movie, but it doesn't quite click together, either. The director doesn't shape the material satisfyingly; this may be one of those rare pictures that suffers from a surfeit of good ideas.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
This picture seems ingenious at the start, but Crichton can't write people, and he directs like a technocrat. This is the emptiest of his pictures to date.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Meryl Streep gives an immaculate, technically accomplished performance as Sarah Woodruff, the romantic mystery woman of John Fowles' novel, but she isn't mysterious. We're not fascinated by Sarah; she's so distanced from us that all we can do is observe how meticulous Streep -- and everything else about the movie -- is.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
This is a bizarre and surprisingly entertaining satirical comedy--the story of the search beyond theatre turned into theatre, or, at least, into a movie.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Directed by George Cukor, this movie has an unflagging pace, but it's full of scenes that don't play, and often you can't even tell what tone was hoped for. It's a tawdry self-parody.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
The best that can be said about this jumbled scrapbook of Joan Crawford's life from her middle years to the end is that it doesn't seem to get in the way of its star, Faye Dunaway, who gives a startling, ferocious performance.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Walter Hill has a dazzling competence as an action director; he uses the locale for its paranoia-inducing strangeness (it suggests Vietnam), and he uses the men to demonstrate what he thinks it takes to survive. Its limitation is that there's nothing underneath the characters' macho masks.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
But the movie is in a stupor; everything is internalized. Duvall is locked in, and De Niro is in his chameleon trance - he seems flaccid, preoccupied...You have to put up a struggle to get anything out of this picture.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
There are potentially funny scenes, but Bergman doesn't know how to give timing and polish to his own jokes.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
Kasdan has eliminated all the conflicting interests and the psychological impediments to a happy marriage, leaving the physical separation as the only obstacle. There's nothing left for the movie to be about except how the hero and the heroine can conquer space. (And at the end, the pictured fudges even this.)- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by
-
-
Reviewed by
Pauline Kael
(Fisk) gives us flowing, expressive images that linger in the memory. What also lingers in the memory are some of the performances Fisk gets: Spacek in particular, who seems grown up, and Roberts, who is unexpectedly simple and open.- The New Yorker
-
Reviewed by