Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies

Which Movies Do People Love to Hate? A Statistical Analysis (statsignificant.com) 52

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
A new statistical analysis has identified the films audiences "love to hate," with Battlefield Earth, Morbius, Grease 2, and Cats topping the list of cinema's most detested productions. The study, published by data analyst Daniel Parris, examined review data from MovieLens to calculate both the percentage of one-star reviews and total disapproval magnitude for each release.

A common thread among these widely derided titles: many were adaptations of popular books or shows, or attempted to capitalize on once-beloved franchises. Adam Sandler leads the actors most frequently appearing in widely disliked films, followed by comedians and action stars who have starred in productions with high one-star review rates.

The research also reveals an industry trend toward increasing one-star reviews over time, with family-oriented fare and horror films receiving disproportionately negative ratings despite consistent box office profitability - suggesting studios have prioritized risk-averse, commercially viable projects over critical acclaim.

Which Movies Do People Love to Hate? A Statistical Analysis More | Reply

Which Movies Do People Love to Hate? A Statistical Analysis

Comments Filter:

  • Manos (Score:3)

    by The-Ixian ( 168184 ) on Thursday March 13, 2025 @11:21AM (#65230325)

    The hands of fate

  • suggesting studios have prioritized risk-averse, commercially viable projects over critical acclaim.

    Aren't we well past this being an established fact?

    • I'm not sure "critical acclaim" is a particularly valuable goal. Creating a great work of art is an excellent goal, but critics as a class are unable to recognize great works of art. They have different goals.

      • "Companies are interested in making money, don't care about culture" is a pretty 'duh' revelation of this exercise. They only seek critical acclaim as far as it might influence people to see their film, leading to the quotes used in the movie trailers and award nominations.

        You could say that the "cult classic" is the movie that was art and the critics didn't realize it.

      • critics as a class are unable to recognize great works of art. They have different goals.

        Being what, exactly?

      • I may matter to the actors and filmmakers though. If you can't brag about being richer than your peers, you need something to rub in their faces.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ichthus ( 72442 )
      To nobody's surprise.

      How about a more controversial choice: ANCHORMAN. Will Ferrell is in two decent movies, and Anchorman is not one of them. He's so annoying.
  • with Chuck Norris.

  • Mixed Bag (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 ) on Thursday March 13, 2025 @11:40AM (#65230381)

    Films like Battlefield Earth and Morbious work because they veer into the "so-bad-its-good" territory where as I have never, ever heard of people saying the same about M.Night's The Last Airbender because that movie is just so-bad-it's-bad.

    It's a tricky place to land but a huge portion of it is if the filmmakers at the time were genuinely trying to make something good and failed. The audience can feel that earnestness as opposed to a soulless cash-grab which fails or worse, when the filmmakers are "in-on-the-joke".

    • Let me just recommend Slotherhouse and show myself out.

      • See now we're talking about "bad movies" to enjoy.

        I have not seen Slotherhouse but it's reminding me of Llamageddon [imdb.com] which was a fun watch so am always down for a "innocuous animals start murdering everyone"

        • See now we're talking about "bad movies" to enjoy.

          I have not seen Slotherhouse but it's reminding me of Llamageddon [imdb.com] which was a fun watch so am always down for a "innocuous animals start murdering everyone"

          Drop everything and go see Rubber right now. A tire goes full rampage. It's awesome in every bad way.

      • I watched this with my wife, it's an alright "bad movie".

        The best ones, though, are those that are earnestly trying to be good movies but fail.

        • I watched this with my wife, it's an alright "bad movie".

          The best ones, though, are those that are earnestly trying to be good movies but fail.

          My DVD copy of The Room just fell off my bookshelf.

    • Re:Mixed Bag (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ksevio ( 865461 ) on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:03PM (#65230445) Homepage

      The problem with The Last Airbender was it was a mediocre movie for people not familiar with the franchise and a bad movie for existing fans. If it were a great or bad movie then it might have something

      • Yeah to be fair I have only seen clips of it but anyone I have come across discussing it says the same: if you were a fan already it was annoying in the liberties it took. If you were coming in fresh it's just boring and ugly to look at, both a couple of the worst things a movie can really be.

      • The problem with The Last Airbender was it was a mediocre movie for people not familiar with the franchise and a bad movie for existing fans. If it were a great or bad movie then it might have something

        I wasn't familiar with the franchise and thought the movie was absolutely trash-level terrible with zero redeeming qualities. It didn't even have "bad movie, but entertaining" energy. M. Night at his worst.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It's interesting which movies *aren't* on the list. While very, very vocal, it seems that the people who hate the new Star Wars movies are a minority. Same with the recent Marvel stuff.

      • Yeah I would definitely class those into that realm of closer to the soulless cash-grab in the sense that if you liked those movies, great, no issues but if you didn't enjoy them they are far from the type of film one would go back and watch "for fun".

        For me I can't even have enough emotion to hate the Sequel Trilogy, I just don't often think about them and that is really the worst thing you can say about a movie.

        At the same time while I still wouldn't call the Prequels "good movies" I think we all remember

      • Same with the recent Marvel stuff.

        Really bad films are at least memorable. Personally I struggle to remember much from Marvel films.

    • Films like Battlefield Earth and Morbious work because they veer into the "so-bad-its-good" territory

      Battlefield Earth is not "so-bad-it's-good." It's just bad. Irredeemably bad.

      It's a tricky place to land but a huge portion of it is if the filmmakers at the time were genuinely trying to make something good and failed.

      For a movie to ascend to the plateau of "so-bad-it's-good" it has to be more than bad. The badness has to have a campy ineptness that goes beyond merely trying hard. Look at the pinnacle of such movies -- Ed Wood's Plan 9 from Outer Space -- and you'll see what I mean.

      • Plan 9 from Outer Space

        Yeah that's a perfect example of what I am talking about and it's kinda what Ed Wood revolves around as a biopic; the man was really, really trying to execute his vision and the failure of that through being so genuine about it makes it an interesting thing to watch. An Ed Wood who is trying to make a bad movie would have made a boring film, not one we talk about today for it's badness.

        Battlefield Earth is a movie that rides that line, I think what tips over the line is Travolta's just... somewhat insane p

  • What a useless statement that is. Most cinema is an adaptations of books. It's like saying "many used video cameras in production".

    • Seems as though they are drawing a correlation that adaptations of books tend to end up in the hated category more often than original screenplays, which if you actually think about it makes sense as you have an entire cohort of your audience with predetermined expectations that will trend them to be extra critical.

  • Oh, I don't know. (Score:3)

    by greytree ( 7124971 ) on Thursday March 13, 2025 @11:49AM (#65230405)
    I guess it's that obscure 60s French art-house thing I saw in an indie cinema in Madrid.

    What, you've never heard of it, let alone seen it?

    What ? Wait, I loved it! The direction, the lighting !
  • There, I said it. I thought it was good at showing what it actually was - not a narrative film, but a 70s style stage production that had a camera pointed at it*. Oddly I'd never have dreamed of going to the theatre to see it, but if you think "musical stage production for you to look at on screen" rather than something that was meant to show a more normal film...I thought it worked.

    * Yes, am aware the stage production was 81 not 70s, but by then it would have been in development a while and honestly it

    • Agreed - I haven't seen the film but I saw the play at the Wintergarden Theater in the 80's.

      It was mostly spectacle in the theatrical sense. Not much energy or emotion.

      Definitely a 70's vibe. Mama Mia would be in the same category. Discrete songs with little connective tissue.

      Les Mis pulled off both spectacle and a good story with a score with a through-line. But that came later and everything evolves including theatre.

      Even so ALW scores are very popular, though they bore me to sleep.

      I can't imagine spe

    • I totally agree. It got caught between two opposing groups: people who hate musicals, and people who love the stage version of Cats and objected to the changes in the movie. Take it on its own terms and it's a lot of fun.

  • Disagree - Wrong metrics (Score:3)

    by will4 ( 7250692 ) on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:04PM (#65230451)

    People have a higher affinity for music, movies, TV that they experience during their teenager years. Later in life, they benchmark new music, movies and TV to the "memory" of experiencing entertainment in their teenage years.

    It's why movie and music online reviews skew towards 5 star fanatics reviews since they are most engaged with the entertainment.

    If you were 15 when 2001 came out, would you rate it a 5 star amazing and the progressively rate successive movies lower due to benchmarking newer moves versus you teenage memories?

    2001 A Space Odyssey (1960s)
    Star Wars - 1976
    Close Encounters - 1979
    The Terminator - 1984
    Cube - 1997
    The Matrix - 1999
    Cloud Atlas - 2012 ...

    • You are probably right, but you forgot one important word:

      "People generally have a higher affinity for music, movies, TV that they experience during their teenager years"

      Because from the short list you posted, the only movie I didn't really like was Cloud Atlas.

  • I hate every frame of that friggin film.

  • My kids dragged me to see it. I managed to wait for it to be over, and out to the parking lot, before I started ranting and cursing.

    Unfuck Bruce Willis.

    • Having Liv Tyler's dad singing the love theme was the highlight of that stinker. And yes, I know that's confusing. So, confusing is the best it gets. Michael Bay and M. Night should both be prevented from making movies, but someone keeps handing them properties to fuck up.

  • And asked this question 20 years ago. You'd still have the same answer. Good luck getting a different idea green-lit in Hollywood. The business model is broken. You don't see epic productions with a big scope and a large cast much anymore because it's too expensive to produce in the first place and then everybody and their mother wants residuals. It's almost as though they have to produce mediocre sequels to cover the cost of the original. Plus, Hollywood is no longer the taste-maker. People are sick

Slashdot Top Deals

TRANSACTION CANCELLED - FARECARD RETURNED

Close