Film critics can't handle the truth: not everything fits a far left PoV.
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2021-11-28 |
You could rationally, write of a few of these as coincidence. But that we have so many examples of reviewers being biased left in reviews, in their activism, and just detesting anything that's "Good" but doesn't align with their leftist agenda. And there's virtually none the other way. That shows a trend.
| Tatometer | Summary |
|---|---|
 |
13 Hours: The secret soldiers in Benghazi - While reviewers (and Rotten Tomatoes reviewers) weren't fan's because of imagined slights against their candidate/party (and only gave it a 50%), viewers widely liked it a lot (giving it 83% approval). I was definitely with the majority of viewers on this one. |
 |
2000 Mules - Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic won't review it. Wikipedia won't create a separate entry for it, and the only blurbs they allow are negative and Fake Fact Checks by far left institutions like the AP. |
 |
2016 Obama's America - While liberal reviewers panned it (because they didn't want any of the sketchy truths about Obama to get out), don't let the reviewers hatred (25% approval) fool you -- viewers gave it a 73%. I was definitely with the majority of viewers on this one. So this -48% difference just shows how out of touch and partisan most movie reviewers are. Discrepancies like this are common when it come to conservative documentaries, and go the other way on liberal ones. |
 |
America: Imagine the World Without her (2014) - 8/84 is a huge (76 point) spread that shows how out of touch reviewers are with their audience. They hated this documentary, because it told them unconfortable truths that they didn't want to hear. (Children tantruming over eating vegetibles). That doesn't mean it is without spin. It's just offering counter-truths to leftist 1/2 truths (if not outright lies). And the left HATES that. |
 |
Angel Has Fallen - While this hits many leftist tropes (Anti-Military, Anti-Corporation, Good Black/Democrat President, bad guys weren't muslim extremists), reviewers only gave it 39%. Audiences gave it 93%. (-54 spread). Are reviewers just racists? Or it was still pro-American/Individual, and that was enough to hate it? |
   |
Atlas Shrugged (Movie Trilogy) - Reviewers were predictably biased against it, either in not seeing or panning it. While these weren't the best action flicks, they were a fuckton better than some of the bad documentaries and shows that the reviewers would sing the praises of. So the Rotten Tomatoes respective spreads of -59% (10/69) and -57% (4/61) and -41% (0/41), exists not to remind us of how bad these movies are (they aren't THAT bad), but to remind us about how out of touch (marxist) that movie critics are. |
 |
The Blind Side - It was the Obama and woke era. Since this wasn't woke enough (showing the true story of a white woman helping a black kid), the Reviews gave it a 66, while the audience gave it a 90% for the actual story/movie. It was nice, sweet - but the far left was looking for a Django Unchained, not the truth about race in America. |
 |
Blockers (2018) - Since it was crass and anti-family values (dumb prudish parents), it got more reviewer support than viewers: 84/51 Rotten Tomatoes (reviewers/audience). I had seen the 84 part, and figured it was probably pretty good... but more often, I side with the audience. And this time was no different. |
|
Book of Henry (2017) - It got only 25% approval from reviewers, it got 71% by audiences (and I tend to associate more with audiences than reviewers). It eventally settled to 22/63. It was good enough, but not great. I think the leftist reviewers hated it, because it was a simplistic caricature of progressives (good) versus conservatives (evil), and it didn't play everyone as victims, but humans were able to adapt to any situation in absurd ways. |
 |
Call of the Wild (2020) - Reviewers didn't like it but audiences appreciated it more for what it is and it got at 62/91 (reviewer/viewer split), later settling to 62/89 on Rotten Tomatoes. Independence, self reliance, a white man, traditional gender roles, a dog that doesn't resent the white wolf patriarchy, it doesn't trash American/family values? The story has nothing for the leftist reviewers to really like. |
 |
The Creepy Line - This got a 0/67 split between reviewers/viewers. The reviewers refused to review it. Google/RT blocked it from being archived. It told the truth abou the left, so was attacked as right-wing propaganda... despite the majority of it being basically true (as understood by a few non-tech guys, that documented valid examples of bias). Proven more true over time. |
 |
Dave Chappelle:The Closer - Woke Mob critics hated it, while Chappelle's audience loved it. He wasn't picking on any group, but he wasn't willing to cave to political correctness either. He has a great message, that went over the heads of the fascist reviewers. As proven by 33/97 reviewer to audience score on RT. |
 |
Death of a Nation - This is one of the most obious movies about marxist bias in mainstream media (and their reviewers). They want to control the culture and narrative, and this one tells historical facts that the far left refuses to consider: that their side has ever done anything wrong in the past, present or will in the future. 0% of them liked it, yet 88% of the Audience did. |
 |
Don't look up - This one hit too many good points for the far left reviewers to like it. So it got 56/77 (-21%) Reviewers to Audience. As dark comedy it wasn't the best, and it was a bit slow at parts... but the message was pretty good, and I think that's what got it deflated review scores, and higher audience ones. |
 |
Fat Head - Super Size Me with less propaganda. Viewers liked it more (77% vs 72%): reviewers snubbed it completely. None that loved Super Size Me wanted to correct the record. So this has -77 (0/77) spread is even more significant, because anyone with journalism in their background would want to get the truth out their, especially if they got it wrong the first time. |
 |
Gemini Man (2019) - Reviewers panned it 26%, while viewers gave it a strong 84%, a 58 point spread. Reviewers usually reserve that kind of hate for something with good morals, something that triggers snowflakes, or the movie didn't play a conservative as the villain -- this didn't really have any of that. The 117 minutes went by quickly and I left feeling that while it wasn't great, it was definitely one of the better films in what wasn't an impressive year.. |
 |
The Trial of America's Biggest Serial Killer - I was surprised the spread was only 60/97 (37%). It still showed the bias of reviewers, but it also showed that over half of them are willing to be semi-honest on the topic of abortion. Which while a patehtic showing, is still a lot more than I would have guessed. So some credit is due that this wasn't in the low double digits. |
|
Hillary's America - Of course lefty reviewers hated it, and since almost all reviewers lean far left, it was hated, and one of the most successful documentaries of all time. It's almost like most conservatives have better aspirations than eating popcorn and criticizing movies they watched (myself excluded). This was one of the widest spreads between reviewers and viewers with the former giving it a 4% approval, and audiences giving it 81% approval. Either way, it proves that reviewers are clueless dolts, out of touch with the audiences they are meant to serve. Maybe next life they can serve a purpose. |
 |
Joker (2019) - Reviewers usually like deep, and thoughtful, and impactful, or for the art (well filmed, acted, directed). This is all of those. But it's still a hard to watch subject. More so if you're a far left reviewer that's showing how exploitive the far left is with their nihilist messages, eat the rich, and the burn it all down philosophy. So because it hits too close to home, the lefty reviews gave it a 70%, while the viewers gave it a 92% -- a 22 point spread. I'm split. On impact it was good. On entertainment? I didn't like it. But don't regret seeing it. |
 |
Laal Singh Chaddha - Reviewers gave this a measly 65%, while audiences gave it a 91%. Reviewers seemed bitter that it was true-to-form (Corny) remake when reviewers wanted them to change/modernize the story. And that it didn't twist modern India problems (with Islamic violence) in a more contraversial way. Sort of missing the point of the film. And they whined about the pacing, which like the original wasn't exactly a Michael Bay film. |
 |
Law Abiding Citizen - This had a 26/75 approval on Rotten Tomatoes (-49 points). That meant I wanted to see it. Since the Criminal Justice system wouldn't give him justice, he took the law into his own hands. That hits home too hard with lefties. They don't want to understand that part of the reason for laws punishing bad guys is to prevent the need for vigilantes and organized crime. So overly sympathetic Judges/prosecutors gets societal backlash. Thus the premise was ubsurd and violence was unecessary. To the rational, it was more complex exploration of good people doing bad things (or actions have consequences). |
 |
London has Fallen (2016) - The reviewers had apoplexy and it got 25/63 critic/audience spread, because snowflakes melted, "good guy americans were killing the evil brown-skinned people". This is not different than Arnold killing White-Russians, or Sylvester killing Asians -- only the wokeness changed. The first film Olympus has Fallen (2013) was the same film, and it got twice the reviewer appoval. If it had been done on Wall St., or blacks killing whites (aka Django Unchained), with it's dumber plot and worse filming, it would have probably gotten the same 88% reviewer approval that film managed. |
 |
Midway - This got a 44/92 split between reviewers/viewers. The reviewers didn't like it because it was a bit of a traditional pro-American WWII film, and anti-American post-modern snowflakes hate that patriotism or America doing anything right. But viewers enjoyed the film anyways. |
| x150px | My Son Hunter (2022) - Many reviewers refused to review it, and those that did often mocked or disparaged it (some admitting they never watched it first). It was bad, because it spoke truth to power, and they like power. |
 |
Rambe: Last Blood - There was a 57 point spread spread between the Reviewers (Critics) and Viewers (Audience) on this one: 29% of critics liked it, while 86% of the audience did. That's always a flag to me, to go watch a film. So that's what inspired me to see it in theaters, and give them my money. It was good... if you wanted to see another Rambo film. A little slower in parts, pretty dark and cerebral... then a lot of violence/revenge. But it's Rambo. People aren't going to see art. |
 |
Richard Jewell - This got a 74/96 split between viewers/reviewers. The reviewers didn't like it as much because it made the far left media look bad for railroading the guy, and they are the lapdogs/employees of those outlets. The viewers obviously liked the sincerity of the story. |
 |
SuperNature - Of course lefty reviewers hated it and gave it a 14% approval. And the audience score? 92%. I was with the audience. The criticism were that he wasn't funny. Bullshit. He was funnier than left wing late night commedians, and they love them. It was that he attacked woke haters, by mocking them more than trans people. (His barbs at trans were usually barbs at woke/cancel culture around Trans). |
 |
The Climate Hustle - Audiences generally liked it (getting 71% on RottenTomatoes), while reviewers did an unofficial boycott of it. Knowing how the other side thinks is key to being able to intelligently discuss or argue a point. But far left reviewers decided to remain ignorant and partisan. Later, RT tanked the audience score to 32, blocked the reviews, and pretended it was never released. The opposite of what they do for leftist drek. |
 |
The Morning Show - There was a surprisingly large Reviewer/Viewer split on this (61/91 -- or 30 point spread). And the reviewers that hated it. Likely because it was too adult and offered greys. Which to me reads that they wanted it to be more clear cut Social Activist Propaganda masquerading as a TV show (all men are bad, all women are saints). But I think the audience responded more because it was surprisingly grey.
|
 |
The Shack - Left leaning reviewers hated the movie (20%), and audiences loved it (84%). Faith and good messages aren't reviewers schtick. They haven't gotten that chip off their shoulders over having to go to Sunday school. But what do you expect from people that like Oliver Stone or Michael Moore documentaries? They won't tolerate any religion over their one true God: statism. Plus, most religious films are traveling well worn metaphorical trails: not much on originality, but more how well the story is told. |
 |
The Trayvon Hoax - This movie was completely removed and censored by Rotten Tomatoes. It was up there for a while, but they pulled it (probably because of backlash from the leftist mob). They hate the truth that much. |
 |
Unhinged - It got a 48/77 (reviewer/viewer) score on RottenTomatoes. It was watchable enough that most people won't hate it... but it was treading on pretty predictable artistic ground, and it brought little new to the screen or genre. Not sure why there was the reviewer spread on this one. Probably because it shows there are bad people out there, and you can't rely on the cops to protect you. |
 |
Unplanned - And as usual, the far left Reviewers panned a movie not because it was bad, but because it told truths they don't want to hear. Reviewers gave it 42% approvale, viewers gave it a 94% -- a -52 pont spread. That means the Reviewers are out of touch, or they're polemics. Audiences are self-selecting this movie based on their open/close mindedness, but Reviewers are demonstrating that too. |
🔗 More
| |
