Washington Post's Scores

  • Movies
  • TV
For 6,724 reviews, this publication has graded:
  • 48% higher than the average critic
  • 2% same as the average critic
  • 50% lower than the average critic
On average, this publication grades 3.2 points lower than other critics. (0-100 point scale)
Average Movie review score: 58
Highest review score: 100 The Damned United
Lowest review score: 0 Alone in the Dark
Score distribution:
6,724 movie reviews
  1. What it possesses in heart and goodwill, it sorely lacks in narrative skill and artistic depth.
    • 66 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    This solo project by first-time producer/director Edward James Olmos makes itself out to be hard-hitting, social commentary. But it's too longwinded and cliched to deserve that description. [13 Mar 1992, p. N47]
    • Washington Post
    • 56 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Opportunities for dramatic tension, comedic effect, erotic energy, even just flat-out weirdness -- all are squandered by Brocka and the actors in a haze of blandness that gives the film all the edge of a particularly gay Gap commercial.
  2. John C. McGinley from "Scrubs" gets to strut some of his comic stuff as the deranged builder, but he's the only passable feature in a property that should be condemned.
  3. The new Dutch film Black Book manages to turn World War II into a large piece of cheese. A lurid, pulpy, slightly perverse potboiler, the movie suffers mainly from its utter lack of seriousness.
  4. If only The Reaping had the decency to be coherent.
  5. Just another thriller, utterly disposable.
    • 68 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Director Michael Winterbottom languidly unspools the story; nothing seems to lead to anything.
    • 53 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Another ultra-stylized movie-about-movies by the Cannes-winning Coen Brothers, Hudsucker is clever but cold, a heartless mechanical gizmo. The actors rattle around tinnily like shiny marbles inside its cavernous sets and hollow script.
  6. So what exactly is the point? Does Jefferson's treatment of Sally Hemings establish his racism or his instinctive color-blindness? Unfortunately, the picture is so unfocused and tumbles so rapidly from one event to another that it's difficult to tell.
  7. It's hard to imagine an audience that won't break up in laughter at this bewildering mixed message: Enjoy this movie, but you really shouldn't be watching it.
  8. An overlong, visually incoherent, mean-spirited and often just plain awful Spider-Man 3.
  9. Here, Lyne indulges more in misdirection than in direction; he's a magician turning a sleazy trick. But even his technical skill breaks down. The picture is garbled and cliched.
    • 46 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    The stories are markedly different, but the acting seems remote and hollow, as if no one believes in what they're doing. [18 Oct 1996]
    • Washington Post
  10. Angel-A is counterfeit art-house chic writ large -- a French film that fails to produce the ineffable charms of the yesteryear movies it brazenly imitates.
    • 54 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Despite Stallone's bantamweight attempts to insert, like, character into the fifth Rocky, it's the same old fight with the same old round of regulars. It seems silly wasting money on actors when the same could be achieved with Muppets. Rocky has little to do except shuffle around and mutter "cute" Rocky t'ings.
    • 60 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Behind the trademark fancy package is a troubling sensibility, too. Spielberg seems unable to come to terms with anything real.
    • 41 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    The Secret Agent, with its hemmed-in shots, feels like a TV production; what is said takes precedence over what is done. Even in the writing department, Hampton founders. [06 Dec 1996]
    • Washington Post
    • 42 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Figgis depends on his considerable ability to evoke mood in a symphony of image, montage and music. But these scenes, watchable as some of them are (and I don't mean the Fall of Man Follies), don't accumulate into much more than abstract mush. [25 Jun 1999]
    • Washington Post
    • 46 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Unless you're a Clint fan there's little other reason to sit through this one.
    • 36 Metascore
    • 30 Critic Score
    Once again, John Rambo guns amok in the name of American democracy, but he packs less dramatic firepower than last time. Rambo III, a poorly paced, much less involving show of guns and machismo, makes you miss "Rambo II" (okay, "Rambo: First Blood Part II").
  11. The movie feels forced, cliched and derivative.
  12. It's gotten to the point where Gooding's presence on a marquee practically guarantees we'll be bashing our heads against the seat in front of us. Bonk, bonk, bonk.
  13. Theroux and company could be said to be "Garden State"-ing, or trying to. Instead of that film's sheen of the touchingly weird, Dedication finds a whole lot of the coldly dumb.
  14. It's a soap opera posing as moral outrage.
  15. the movie comes on as a novelty item, meaning it's so full of disparate parts and so unable to approach coherence, it just sits there and burns out.
  16. By introducing silly elements into a serious endeavor, the filmmakers undercut their own movie. In the end, we're watching a somewhat exploitative movie about exploitation.
  17. Del Toro will probably get an Oscar nod for his Jerry, because the film is so full of Oscar moments, including a cold-turkey detox bit. He rumbles and shivers and screeches and bangs his head on the wall and takes a shower in his clothes. I never believed a second of it.
  18. A Mexican movie in which the outcome is never in doubt, the scenes are endless -- sorry, we meant poetic-- and the false beard on the central character's face looks as though it could use a little extra gum.
  19. Overdresses and ultimately abandons what drew us to its 1998 predecessor in the first place: an intimate embrace with history.

Top Trailers