Christian Science Monitor's Scores

  • Movies
  • TV
For 3,626 reviews, this publication has graded:
  • 56% higher than the average critic
  • 2% same as the average critic
  • 42% lower than the average critic
On average, this publication grades 4.2 points higher than other critics. (0-100 point scale)
Average Movie review score: 66
Highest review score: 100 The Trials of Henry Kissinger
Lowest review score: 0 Bio-Dome
Score distribution:
3,626 movie reviews
  1. The dialogue is dumb ('zilla has the best lines, "arrrrrggh" and "maaroarrr"), New York is waterlogged, and Godzilla isn't on screen enough.
  2. It's a sort of soullessly cheerful cynicism that is about as far from Seuss as one can imagine.
  3. The overlong comedy has few laughs and flirts far too much with racist, homophobic humor. A waste of a fine cast.
  4. Sordid and sleazy, although the lead performances are hard to fault.
  5. The bad thing about A Guy Thing isn't the talent of its stars but the warmed-over triteness of the material they're forced to work with.
  6. I hope Keaton doesn't begin to make a specialty of these roles. They play into what is least attractive in her repertoire – the loosey-goosey, knockabout side of her that all too swiftly devolves into hysterics.
  7. Even the delightful Duff disappoints.
    • 16 Metascore
    • 25 Critic Score
    Beverly Hills Cop III is perhaps the dumbest of the cop trio. There are no surprises, there's no real police work to unravel, and there are no mysteries. It's all very predictable with lots of gunplay, noise, and blood. [3 Jun 1994]
    • Christian Science Monitor
  8. Norton's high-energy acting is the only element that saves the picture from being a total loss.
  9. The plot is hamstrung by trite formulas, and there's too much violence and family tension for very young viewers. Shaquille O'Neal is likable as the title character, though.
  10. Let's look at the bright side. If this movie bombs as it deserves to, we won't have to sit through "Analyze Those" a few years from now!
  11. Strenuously unfunny sequel.
  12. Perry and Hurley don't have much chemistry, and the story is so dumb you might want to sue it for stupidity.
  13. I hate to sound per-Snickety, but this lemon of a movie is a sadly unfortunate event.
  14. It's a mash-up of blah buddy comedy and gross-out CGI monster splatter, with nary a laugh to be had.
  15. This sexually explicit South Korean drama aims more to jolt than to illuminate, but it illustrates an aspect of Asian cinema that globally minded moviegoers should know about as films from that region take on more international prominence.
  16. Weak acting, even by Hoffman. Aniston is so far above this material she should never, ever have signed on.
  17. The only point of interest in New in Town is sociological. In the current economic climate, this comedy about workers whose livelihood is rescued by a benevolent boss represents the ultimate wish-fulfillment fantasy. Don't spend your hard-earned discretionary cash on it.
  18. This is a great subject for a movie, but Hollywood has squandered the opportunity, using it as a prop for warmed-over melodrama and the kind of choreographed mayhem that director John Woo has built his career on.
  19. It will be interesting to see whether audiences embrace Mr. Diesel's barely controlled vigilante as warmly as they embraced Clint Eastwood's swaggering "Dirty Harry" and Charles Bronson's nasty "Death Wish" characters a few decades ago.
  20. The film contains so many endings that it's hard to tell what impressions the filmmakers want us to leave the theater with. Buy a copy of the book instead. It remains an excellent read.
  21. The effect is intended to be ghastly – which it certainly is – but I was equally repelled by this film’s conceit. Oppenheimer allows murderous thugs free rein to preen their atrocities, and then fobs it all off as some kind of exalted art thing. This is more than an aesthetic crime; it’s a moral crime.
  22. Maybe Jackson should avoid any more movies with "snake" in the title.
  23. House of D, arrives in theaters this week, after debuting at the Tribeca Film Festival last year. I'm sorry to report it's the opposite of impressive.
  24. The story is too self-conscious about its offbeat qualities, becoming so cool that it practically freezes on the screen.
  25. Viewers of that age may overlook the contrived situations and the awful acting, which consists mainly of frozen grins. Nobody else will.
  26. David Cronenberg's movie is a chilly meditation on this theme, carrying some cinematic interest but surprisingly dull given the story's outrageous subject.
  27. The dialogue is utterly inane, but the high-tech effects deliver the sort of thrills that disaster-film connoisseurs expect.
  28. The film is a disappointment, and at more than two hours' running time, a very long disappointment.
  29. The repetitious script -- cobbled together by no fewer than five writers -- shows interest in nothing beyond action-centered plot gimmicks and tame romantic shenanigans.

Top Trailers