imdb for movie review

Whose ratings should you trust? IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, or Fandango?

By Alex Olteanu

A data scientist investigates

Should you watch a movie? Well, there are a lot of factors to consider, such as the director, the actors, and the movie’s budget. Most of us base our decision off of a review, a short trailer, or just by checking the movie’s rating.

There are a few good reasons you would want to avoid reading reviews, or watching a trailer, although they bring much more information than a rating.

First, you may want to completely avoid spoilers, no matter how small. I understand that!

Second, it could be that you want an uninfluenced experience of watching that movie. This usually applies only to reviews, which are sprinkled with frames, like “this is a movie about the complexity of the universe” or “this movie is really not about love”. Once these frames get encoded in your short-term memory, it’s really hard to stop them from interfering with your own movie experience.

Another good reason is that if you’re tired or hurried, you might not want to read a review, let alone watch a 2-minute trailer.

So a numeric movie rating seems to be a good solution in quite a few situations, for quite a few people.

This article aims to recommend a single website to quickly get an accurate movie rating, and offers a robust, data-driven argumentation for it.

Criteria for “the best”

Making such a recommendation is a lot like saying “this is the best place to look for a movie rating,” which is an evaluative statement, resting on some criteria used to determine what is better, what is worse or worst, and what is best, in this case. For my recommendation, I will use one single criterion: a normal distribution.

The best place to look for a movie rating is to see whose ratings are distributed in a pattern which resembles the most, or is identical to, the pattern of a normal distribution, which is this: given a set of values lying in a certain interval, most of them are in the middle of it, and the few others at that interval’s extremes. Generally, this is how a normal (also called Gaussian) distribution looks like:

What’s the rationale behind this criterion? Well, from my own experience consisting of several hundred movies, I can tell that I’ve seen:

• a few outstanding ones that I’ve watched several times
• a couple that were really appalling, and made me regret the time spent watching them
• and a whole bunch of average ones, for most of which I can’t even remember the plot anymore.

I believe that most people — whether critics, cinephiles, or just regular moviegoers — have had a similar experience.

If movie ratings do indeed express movie quality, then we should see the same pattern for both.

Given that most of us assess the bulk of movies as being of an average quality, we should see the same pattern when we analyze movie ratings. A similar logic applies for bad and good movies.

If you’re not yet persuaded that there should be such a correspondence between the patterns, think about the distribution of ratings for a single movie. As many people rate the movie, it’s not a leap of faith to assume that most often there will be many of them with similar preferences. They’ll generally agree that the movie is either bad, average, or good (I will quantify later these qualitative values). Also, there will be a few others who assess the movie with one of the other two qualitative values.

If we visualized the distribution of all the ratings for an individual movie, we would most likely see that one single cluster forms in one of the areas corresponding to a low, an average, or a high rating.

Provided most movies are considered average, the cluster around the average area has the greatest likelihood of occurring, and the other two clusters have a smaller (but still significant) likelihood. (Note that all these likelihoods can be quantified in principle, but this would require a lot of data, and would have the potential to turn this article into a book.)

The least likely would be a uniform distribution in which there are no clusters, and people’s preferences are split almost equally across the three qualitative values.

Given these likelihoods, the distribution of ratings for a large enough sample of movies should be one with a blunt cluster in the average area, bordered by bars of decreasing height (frequency), resembling, thus, a normal distribution.

If you have found all this hard to understand, consider this illustration:

IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, Fandango, or Metacritic?

Now that we have a criterion to work with, let’s dive into the data.

There are a lot of websites out there that come up with their own movie ratings. I have chosen only four, mainly based on their popularity, so that I could get ratings for movies with an acceptable number of votes. The happy winners are IMDB , Fandango , Rotten Tomatoes , and Metacritic .

For the last two, I have focused only on their iconic rating types — namely the tomatometer , and the metascore — mainly because these are more visible to the user on each of the websites (meaning it’s quicker to find them). These are also shared on the other two websites (the metascore is shared on IMDB and the tomatometer on Fandango). Besides these iconic ratings, both websites also have a less-featured rating type where only users get to contribute.

I have collected ratings for some of the most voted and reviewed movies in 2016 and 2017. The cleaned dataset has ratings for 214 movies, and can be downloaded from this Github repo .

I haven’t collected ratings for movies released before 2016, simply because a slight change has occurred in Fandango’s rating system soon after Walt Hickey’s analysis , which I will refer to later in this article.

I’m aware that working with a small sample is risky, but at least this is compensated by getting the most recent snapshot of the ratings’ distributions.

Before plotting and interpreting the distributions, let me quantify the qualitative values I used earlier: on a 0 to 10 scale, a bad movie is somewhere between 0 and 3, an average one between 3 and 7, and a good one between 7 and 10.

Please take note of the distinction between quality and quantity. To keep it discernible in what follows, I will refer to ratings (quantity) as being low, average, or high. As before, the movie quality is expressed as bad, average, or good. If you worry about the “average” term being the same, don’t, because I will take care to avoid any ambiguity.

Now let’s take a look at the distributions:

At a simple glance, it can be noticed that the metascore’s histogram (that’s what this kind of graph is called) most closely resembles a normal distribution. It has a thick cluster in the average area composed of bars of irregular heights, which makes the top neither blunt, neither sharp.

However, they are more numerous and taller than the bars in each of the other two areas, which decrease in height towards extremes, more or less gradually. All these clearly indicate that most of the metascores have an average value, which is pretty much what we’re looking for.

In the case of IMDB, the bulk of the distribution is in the average area as well, but there is an obvious skew towards the highest average values. The high ratings area looks similar to what would be expected to be seen for a normal distribution in that part of the histogram. However, the striking feature is that the area representing low movie ratings is completely empty, which raises a big question mark.

Initially, I put the blame on the small sample, thinking that a larger one would do more justice to IMDB. Luckily, I was able to find a ready-made dataset on Kaggle containing IMDB ratings for 4,917 different movies. To my great surprise, the distribution looked like this:

The shape of the distribution looks almost the same as that for the sample with 214 movies, except for the low ratings area, which is in this case feebly populated with 46 movies (out of 4917). The bulk of the values is still in the average area, which makes the IMDB rating worth considering further for a recommendation, although is clearly hard to rival the metascore, with that skew.

Anyway, what’s really great about this outcome is that it can be used as a strong argument to support the thesis that the 214-movies sample is fairly representative for the whole population. In other words, there’s a greater confidence now that the results of this analysis would be the same — or at least similar — to the results reached if absolutely all the movie ratings from all the four websites were analyzed.

With this increased confidence, let’s move on to examining the distribution of Fandango’s ratings, which doesn’t seem to have changed much since Hickey’s analysis. The skew is still visibly towards the higher part of the movie rating spectrum, where most of the ratings reside. The area for the lower half of the average ratings is completely empty, just like the one for low ratings. It can easily be concluded that the distribution is quite far from fitting my criterion. Consequently, I won’t consider it further for a possible recommendation.

(I promise that the torment of scrolling up will end soon. It’s much easier to compare the distributions if they are placed one near the other, rather than having them scattered across the article.)

Lastly, the tomatometer’s distribution is unexpectedly uniform, and would look even flatter under a different binning strategy (a binning strategy is defined by the total number of bars and their ranges; you can play with these two parameters when you’re generating a histogram).

This distribution is not easy to interpret in context, because the tomatometer it’s not a classical rating, but rather represents the percentage of critics who gave a positive review to a movie. This makes it unfit for the bad-average-good qualitative framework, because it makes movies either good, either bad. Anyway, I guess it should still boil down to the same normal distribution, with most of the movies having a moderate difference between the number of positive reviews and the negative ones (rendering many ratings of 30% — 70% positive reviews), and a few movies having a significantly bigger difference, in one way or the other.

Given the last consideration and the shape of the distribution, the tomatometer doesn’t meet my criterion. It could be that a larger sample would do it more justice, but even so, if I were to recommend it, I would do it with some reserves because of the vague positive or negative rating system.

At this point of the analysis, I could say that by looking at the distributions, my recommendation is the metascore.

However, the IMDB’s distribution seems to be worth considering as well, especially if you tweak a little the rating intervals for the three qualitative categories (intervals which I defined myself, more or less arbitrarily). From this perspective, recommending the metascore by mostly doing a visual examination is clearly not enough.

So, I will try to delimit between these two by using a quantitative method.

The idea is to use the Fandango variable as a negative reference, and then determine which variable, from the IMDB rating and the metascore, is the least correlated with it (I call these variables because they can take different values — for example, the metascore is a variable because it takes different values, depending on the movie).

I will simply compute some correlation coefficients, and the variable with the smallest value will be my recommendation (I will explain then how these correlation coefficients work). But before that, let me briefly justify choosing the Fandango variable as a negative reference.

Fandango’s users love movies too much

One reason for this choice is that the distribution of Fandango’s movie ratings is the furthest from that of a normal one, having that obvious skew towards the higher part of the movie ratings spectrum.

The other reason is the cloud of suspicion around Fandango left by Walt Hickey’s analysis . On October 2015, he was also puzzled by a similar distribution, and discovered that on Fandango’s website the numerical ratings were always rounded to the next highest half-star, not to the nearest one (for example, a 4.1 average rating for a movie would have been rounded to 4.5 stars, instead of 4.0).

The Fandango team fixed the biased rating system, and told Hickey that the rating logic was rather a “software glitch” on their website, pointing towards an unbiased system on their mobile app. (More about this on Hickey’s article .) The adjustment did change some statistical parameters for the better, but not enough to convince me not to work with the Fandango variable as a negative reference.

This is what the change looks like:

Now, let’s zoom in on Fandango:

Between the metascore and the IMDB rating, which is the least correlated with the Fandango rating?

The least correlated with the Fandango rating is the metascore. It has a Pearson’s r value of 0.38 with respect to Fandango, while the IMDB rating has a value of 0.63.

Now let me explain all this.

As two variables change, taking different values, they are correlated if there’s a pattern corresponding to both changes. Measuring correlation simply means measuring the extent to which there is such a pattern.

One of the ways to perform this measure is to compute the Pearson’s r. If the value is +1.0, it means there’s a perfect positive correlation, and if it’s -1.0, it means there’s a perfect negative correlation.

The extent to which the variables are correlated decrease as the Pearson’s r approaches 0, from both the negative and the positive side.

Let’s better visualize this:

Now, to put the abstraction above into context, if we compare how the values for two rating types change — say Fandango’s and IMDB’s — we can determine the degree to which there’s a pattern corresponding to both changes.

Given the correlation coefficients just mentioned, there is a pattern between Fandango and IMDB to a greater extent than is for Fandango and the metascore. Both coefficients are positive, and, as such, the correlation is said to be positive, which means that as Fandango’s ratings go up, IMDB’s ratings tend to go up as well, more than the metascores do.

Put differently, for any given movie rating on Fandango, it is more probable that the metascore is going to be more different from it than the IMDB rating.

The verdict: use Metacritic’s metascore

All in all, I recommend checking the metascore whenever you are looking for a movie rating. Here’s how it works, and its downsides.

In a nutshell, the metascore is a weighted average of many reviews coming from reputed critics. The Metacritic team reads the reviews and assigns each a 0–100 score, which is then given a weight, mainly based on the review’s quality and source. You can find more about their rating system here .

Now, I just want to point out a few downsides of the metascore:

• The weighting coefficients are confidential, so you won’t get to see the extent to which each review counted in the metascore.
• You’ll have a rough time finding metascores for less-known movies that appeared before 1999, the year Metacritic was created.
• Some recent movies whose main language is not English aren’t even listed on Metacritic. For example, the Romanian movies Two Lottery Tickets (2016) and Eastern Business (2016) are not listed on Metacritic, while they are on IMDB, with ratings.

Few more words

To sum up, in this article I made a single recommendation of where to look for a movie rating. I recommended the metascore, based on two arguments: its distribution resembles the most a normal one, and it is the least correlated with the Fandango rating.

All the quantitative and the visual elements of the article are reproducible in Python, as it is shown here .

Thanks for reading! And happy movie-going!

freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More

If you read this far, thank the author to show them you care. Say Thanks

Learn to code for free. freeCodeCamp's open source curriculum has helped more than 40,000 people get jobs as developers. Get started

IMDb vs. Rotten Tomatoes vs. Metacritic: Which Movie Ratings Site Is Best?

Your changes have been saved

Email is sent

Email has already been sent

Please verify your email address.

You’ve reached your account maximum for followed topics.

5 Reasons Microsoft Loop Is Underrated for Collaboration

I'm done with streaming platforms: here's why i'm heading back to cable, i got chatgpt to roast my instagram page, and it was glorious.

Thanks to online ratings, it's easier than ever to know whether or not a movie is worth watching. A quick Google search brings up plenty of websites offering their opinions on the latest films.

The three most popular are IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, and Metacritic. But how do these sites differ, and which should you trust for information on movies? Here's everything you need to know.

The Internet Movie Database (IMDb) is a gigantic compendium of movies, TV shows, and video games. Its primary use is to find detailed information about any actor, producer, or piece of media content.

When you pull up a movie, you'll see a synopsis, trailers, photos, a cast list, trivia, and much more. What makes IMDb so useful is its cross-referencing. Upon opening the page for an actor, you'll see their best-known roles. Thus, IMDb is great for those "what else have I seen her in?" moments.

The IMDb mobile app takes this a step further. If you create an account and give ratings to movies and other media, you'll see a You may know them from field on an actor's page if you've rated something they appeared in.

With a free IMDb account, you can also create a Watchlist of movies you want to see. Along with contributing to the 10-point rating scale with other users, IMDb has many other useful features to offer if you're interested.

Pros of IMDb

Unlike the other two sites, IMDb's reviews come solely from users. It only takes a minute to sign up for IMDb and leave a review, so there's little barrier to entry.

Thus, IMDb's biggest strength is that its scores gives you a good idea of what normal consumers think of it. Professional critics have no influence on IMDb scores.

IMDb has a weighted average system to prevent users from rigging the score, but the service doesn't make it clear exactly how this works. Click the review count next to the star icon on any movie's page to see a breakdown of how people rated it.

Below the overall star average, you can see how the ratings break down by a few demographics, including age and gender.

Cons of IMDb

IMDb's biggest problem is that like other platforms, most people only leave reviews if they love or hate a film. Thus, this skews the scores in favor of either fanboys or haters.

People who want to boost a movie's perception will likely rate the movie a 10, while those who didn't like it will give a rating of one. This means you should read a handful of reviews to get a full picture of the movie's quality.

Rotten Tomatoes

Rotten Tomatoes is a trusted source for movie reviews sourced from critics. Every movie uses the "Tomatometer" to score the quality of a film. If the critic liked the movie, a red tomato appears by their review. When they don't like it, you'll see a green splat instead.

As long as 60 percent or more of critics like the movie, it earns an overall Fresh score with a red tomato. If under 60 percent of critics rate the movie favorably, it earns a Rotten score with a green splat.

Meanwhile, a Certified Fresh badge appears next to titles that are of particularly high quality. They must hold at least a 75 percent favorable score after 80 reviews, including at least five from top critics.

Open any movie's page, and you'll see the overall score plus its number of reviews at the top. Click See Score Details for a deeper breakdown. The Critics Consensus , present for most movies, is a great summary of why the movie received its score.

Rotten Tomatoes also providers a user score, shown by the popcorn bucket. When at least 60 percent of users rated it 3.5 stars (out of 5) or higher, it shows a full bucket. A tipped-over bucket represents that under 60 percent of users gave it under 3.5 stars. Since you can use half-star ratings, this is close to the IMDb score.

In 2019, Rotten Tomatoes made some changes to reduce "review bombing" of movies. There's no longer a Want to See percentage, and you'll also see a check next to user reviews where the site has confirmed that the person actually bought a ticket to the movie.

At the bottom of a movie's page, you can read excerpts from the critic reviews, filter by fresh or rotten, or only show top critics. Search for your favorite actors, and you can check the scores of films they appeared in.

Related: Sites Like Rotten Tomatoes to Find Average Ratings and Reviews for Anything

Pros of Rotten Tomatoes

Rotten Tomatoes has the advantage of sourcing its reviews from trusted critics. The Rotten Tomatoes criteria page explains that the site only takes reviews from trusted newspapers, podcasts, and websites. In theory, this means that only the opinions of the most-trusted movie critics influence the Rotten Tomatoes review.

The Top Critic designation lets you filter by the absolute best critics if you prefer. You can't get a more professional opinion than from these folks.

Overall, Rotten Tomatoes does a good job of letting you know at a glance whether or not a movie is worth your time. The easily identifiable icons, overall score, and consensus summary only take a moment to scan.

Cons of Rotten Tomatoes

The biggest issue with Rotten Tomatoes is that it breaks down complex opinions into a Yes or No score. It scores a critic who thought the movie was decent but had some flaws (say, a 59 percent rating) the same as one who thought the movie was absolute garbage (a zero percent score).

You'll notice this with the Average Rating under the score. Take Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle as an example. Of the 232 critic reviews, 177 of them are positive. This gives the movie a score of 76 percent. However, the critics rated the movie an average of 6.2/10---quite a bit under the 76 percent displayed on the page.

This doesn't mean the scores on Rotten Tomatoes are useless, of course. But it's important to remember that there's nuance in individual reviews, and the Fresh/Rotten system effectively turns every rating into a 100 or 0 score.

Metacritic aggregates reviews of movies and TV shows, plus video games and music albums. It's one of the best sites for gamers , but it can give you a good idea on the quality of movies too.

The site collects reviews from many sources and aggregates them into one "metascore" from 0 to 100. It displays a color and one-line indication of quality based on the overall score, with the following used for movies, TV, and albums:

• 81-100: Universal Acclaim (Green)
• 61-80: Generally Favorable Reviews (Green)
• 40-60: Mixed or Average Reviews (Yellow)
• 20-39: Generally Unfavorable Reviews (Red)
• 0-19: Overwhelming Dislike (Red)

Unlike Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic uses a weighted average system. Nobody knows the exact details, but the service assigns more importance to some sources than others. Like the other two sites, Metacritic also includes a separate user score, which does not influence the critic score.

The Pros of Metacritic

Metacritic avoids the Rotten Tomatoes problem of scoring every review as simply "good" or "bad." A review of 50 percent gets mixed in with the rest to create the metascore. Thus, the score you see on Metacritic is closer to the average review, as opposed to the percentage of critics who simply liked the movie on Rotten Tomatoes.

Additionally, among these three sites, Metacritic is the only one to feature full user reviews right next to critic reviews. This makes it easy to compare what the general public thinks compared to the professionals.

The Cons of Metacritic

While it's easy to translate a score from a five-star or 10-point scale, Metacritic's way of translating letter grade is questionable. We can see how this works on the About Metascores page :

While scoring an A as 100 percent makes sense, note the scores for B- and F , for instance. A 67 percent score for a B- seems a bit harsh. In most schools, a score of 67 percent is closer to an F than it is a B- .

And scoring an F as 0 percent seems unfair. Something like 20 percent for an F might be more appropriate. Because every site has different scales for scoring (some might not even use pluses and minuses), this could skew a reviewer's original meaning.

Also, unlike Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic seems to have few public standards. There's no detailed information on where it sources it critics from. Thus, the score potentially doesn't have as much weight behind it as Rotten Tomatoes does.

What Is the Best Movie Rating Website?

So we've now taken a look at IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, and Metacritic, and listed their major pros and cons. As you might have guessed, there's no one website that's best for everything.

However, we can recommend each of these sites for different reasons:

• IMDb is great for seeing what general audiences think of a movie. If you don't care what the critics say and want to see what people like yourself thought of a film, then you should use IMDb. Just be aware that fans often skew the vote with 10-star ratings, which may inflate scores somewhat.
• Rotten Tomatoes offers the best overall picture of whether a movie is worth seeing at a glance. If you only trust the opinions of top critics and just want to know if a movie is at least decent, you should use Rotten Tomatoes. While the Fresh/Rotten binary can oversimplify the often complex opinions of critics, it should still help you weed out lousy films.
• Metacritic offers the most balanced aggregate score. If you don't mind which critics' opinions go into the final score and prefer seeing a general average, then you should use Metacritic. Its standards are mostly unknown, but Metacritic makes it easy to compare professional and user reviews side-by-side.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with checking all three of these sites every time you're thinking of seeing a movie. Over time, you should figure out which site's tastes most match yours; then you'll know which is best for you personally.

Personal Taste Still Matters Most

Remember that movie scores aren't everything. All three of these sites don't, for instance, paint an accurate picture of movies that are so bad they're good. Because those movies are objectively terrible, they carry low scores even though they have ironic value.

Plus, it's impossible to sum up complex opinions from dozens of people into a single number. And no matter what the critics or general public think, your preferences might be totally different anyway. There's nothing wrong with enjoying a movie that most people find stupid. So while these sites are helpful, don't take them too seriously.

• Entertainment

The 25 Highest-Rated Movies on IMDb, Ranked by Votes

Your changes have been saved

Email is sent

Email has already been sent

Please verify your email address.

You’ve reached your account maximum for followed topics.

While internet popularity can be a fickle and fleeting thing, in the case of IMDb , there are a few top-rated movies that tower above their rivals and stand the test of time . Moviegoers can rate the films they see on the website, and some are cemented as being at the top of their class. Seen by many as the go-to resource for film ratings and opinions, the ten most-voted films are usually, if not some of the best movies of all time. At the very least, IMDb's top movies are comfortably the internet's favorite movies and are likely recognizable to most viewers.

As IMDb continues to be a popular resource for those looking for must-see 10-star movies, its ratings and number of voters also constantly change as more viewers flock to the site to share their opinions about their favorite films. For the most-voted movies on the platform, they remain above these shifts, except for some subtle differences in their ranking and number of votes.

25 'Schindler's List' (1993)

Votes: 1.5 million | imdb rating: 9.0.

The magnum opus of legendary filmmaker Steven Spielberg , Schindler's List has consistently been in conversation as one of the greatest and most acclaimed films of all time ever since its release 30 years ago. The film follows the incredible true story of businessman Oskar Schindler ( Liam Neeson ), in his pivotal and important role in using factory jobs as a way to save over a thousand Jewish lives from the Nazis during the holocaust and World War II.

Much like many of the other movies in the IMDb Top 250, Schindler's List 's high placement on the site as the #6 best film of all time brings many more eyes and attention to check it out and provide their own votes. This is all on top of the massive legacy that the film had already cemented for itself before this point, winning the Academy Award for Best Picture and being one of the most influential dramas of the 90s. The only thing holding this back from having as many votes as others in the top 10 is the movie's gargantuan 3+ hour length , which is daunting to some casual viewers.

Schindler's List (1995)

Not available

24 'The Avengers' (2012)

Votes: 1.5 million | imdb rating: 8.0.

The first true crossover and quintessential chapter of the Marvel Cinematic Universe , The Avengers proved the concept of a shared universe and took the world by storm in a way that had never truly been seen before. The film follows Nick Fury ( Samuel L. Jackson ), director of the international peacekeeping agency known as S.H.I.E.L.D., who enacts the "Avengers Initiative" in calling together a group of heroes in order to stop a new global threat.

Seeing characters from four different blockbuster movies coming together in a beautiful, hilarious, and action-packed thrill ride made a massive splash among audiences, and set the MCU up for success in the decade to come. Even still, as the franchise has seen theoretically higher highs and greater moments, the original crossover event film still has a special place in the eyes of the IMDb user base , as it's still the most voted and popular among the entire franchise.

The Avengers

23 'shutter island' (2010), votes: 1.5 million | imdb rating: 8.2.

One of many iconic and masterful films by director Martin Scorsese , Shutter Island 's high tension, powerful mystery, and iconic twist has helped the film become a fan favorite among the IMDb user base. The film follows the story of soldier turned U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels ( Leonardo DiCaprio ), who is in the middle of investigating the mysterious disappearance of a patient from the hospital for the criminally insane. However, his search proves to be much more difficult than expected, as he is riddled with an array of troubling visions as well as a strange, unknown doctor.

While Scorsese has certainly had higher-rated and more beloved films both before and since Shutter Island , its timing of release, all-star cast, and mystery element have helped it find a massive audience on IMDb . The film's 2010 release coincides with the most popular era of the site's history, bringing many eyes to the newest release from one of the most beloved and acclaimed directors of all time following up on his legendary Best Picture win, The Departed . This, combined with the also high popularity of DiCaprio in 2010, skyrocketed the film to being one of the most watched and rated on the site.

Shutter Island

22 'joker' (2019), votes: 1.5 million | imdb rating: 8.4.

One of the most infamous and controversial superhero movies of all time, Joker 's gritty, R-rated origin story of the clown prince of crime quickly made a name for itself as one of the most defining films of the generation. The film follows the story of failed stand-up comedian Arthur Fleck as the struggles and tribulations of society slowly but surely fracture his mind and transform him into the vicious villainous figure, The Joker. The film also featured a brilliant lead performance by Joaquin Phoenix , who won his first Academy Award for his work in the film.

Joker found the perfect balance between awards contention and mass controversy that quickly made it a must-watch film . Critics were widely divided on the film, audiences fell in love with the film, news outlets were discussing the dangerous aspects of the film's themes and messaging, and all of this combined quickly made Joker one of the biggest films of recent memory. It became the first R-rated film to gross over a billion dollars , and with the upcoming sequel on the horizon, the film's legacy and popularity only continue to grow day by day.

Joker (2019)

21 'saving private ryan' (1998), votes: 1.6 million | imdb rating: 8.6.

A technological marvelstone and one of many masterpieces from Steven Spielberg at the height of his career, Saving Private Ryan is one of the first films that people think of when they think of war dramas. The film follows a group of U.S. troops who, after storming the beaches of Normandy in World War II, come to the realization that three brothers died on the battlefield, with the fourth now being trapped behind enemy lines. In order to save him and give the family some refugee, Captain John Miller ( Tom Hanks ) and a group of seven men are tasked with going behind enemy lines in able to bring Private Ryan home.

The film's striking and nightmarishly realistic portrayal of WWII battles and the carnage of warfare left a powerful impact on audiences that can still be felt today as one of the most influential American war films of all time . The film was largely touted as one of Spielberg's best throughout the 2000s and 2010s, leading to many IMDb users watching and raving about the film and its masterful execution. The film now sits on IMDb as the #24 highest-rated movie of all time, continuing to draw in a larger and larger audience atop its pedestal as one of the highest rated war films on the site.

Saving Private Ryan

20 'the silence of the lambs' (1991).

A cinematic masterpiece and still the first movie many think of when considering psychological horror, The Silence of the Lambs is an award-winning film directed by Jonathan Demme based on Thomas Harris ' eponymous 1988 novel. It tells the story of a young FBI trainee, Clarice Starling ( Jodie Foster ), who asks the imprisoned Dr. Hannibal Lecter ( Anthony Hopkins ) for help in her pursuit of a serial killer, "Buffalo Bill" ( Ted Levine ).

Hopkins' performance as the brilliant psychiatrist and notorious cannibal helps cement the character as a pop culture icon . The timeless film's cat-and-mouse game between Clarice and Lecter, coupled with Buffalo Bill's gruesome crimes, creates a suspenseful atmosphere that's still just as riveting upon a well-deserved rewatch today. The votes on IMDb prove that Silence of the Lambs deserves all the praise it received.

The Silence of the Lambs

19 'the wolf of wall street' (2013), votes: 1.6 million | imdb rating: 8.2.

Based on the true story of Jordan Belfort 's career as a stockbroker as outlined in his eponymous 2007 memoir, director Martin Scorsese 's The Wolf of Wall Street is a renowned dark comedy movie. It revolves around the charismatic stockbroker's (played by Leonardo DiCaprio ) experiences as he rises to financial success after opening his own firm, which engages in fraud and other criminal activities. It also chronicles his epic downfall after his infamy catches the attention of the authorities.

A fantastic movie about excess , the high-energy, darkly comedic exploration of Belfort's unbridled ambition is wholly original and wildly entertaining. This unapologetic portrayal of the chaotic and hedonistic world of Wall Street in the 1990s has understandably been a point of debate among critics and audiences, but it doesn't take away from the film's enduring popularity.

The Wolf of Wall Street

18 'batman begins' (2005).

Christian Bale 's Batman is introduced to millions of fans in Christopher Nolan 's first entry in The Dark Knight trilogy, Batman Begins . The first in the legendary superhero movie trilogy tells the origin story of the legendary DC anti-hero, all the way to his fight against Ra's al Ghul ( Liam Neeson ) and the Scarecrow ( Cillian Murphy ), who want nothing more than to see Gotham in shambles.

The 2005 movie would mark an important turn in the superhero genre, proving that blockbusters can be infused with gritty realism and psychological depth, particularly for the iconic character it portrays. Its depiction of Batman's journey from a traumatized orphan to the caped crusader captures the character's complexities and inner turmoil with ease, laying the groundwork for what many still consider to be the best film series that depicts the anti-hero.

Batman Begins

17 'inglourious basterds' (2009), votes: 1.6 million | imdb rating: 8.4.

One of Quentin Tarantino 's most iconic films, Inglourious Basterds is a unique war movie set during World War II that follows a group of American soldiers led by Lieutenant Aldo Raine ( Brad Pitt ), as they embark on a mission to hunt and exterminate Nazis. Another plot running alongside this is Shosanna Dreyfus' ( Mélanie Laurent ) plan to assassinate Nazi Germany's leadership, and the two stories collide in an explosive way.

Tarantino's movie is a remarkable combination of historical drama, dark humor, and intense action , with its unexpected narrative structure only enhancing the unfolding events. It's a one-of-a-kind humorous portrayal of what is one of the darkest periods of history. Of course, career-best performances from actors like Christoph Waltz (for his portrayal of the villainous Colonel Hans Landa) add depth and an element of rewatchability to the 2009 film.

Inglourious Basterds

16 'gladiator' (2000), votes: 1.6 million | imdb rating: 8.5.

Director Ridley Scott 's Gladiator is a masterwork in the historical drama genre. Starring Russell Crowe as Roman general Maximus Decimus Meridius, the film portrays his great fall following a betrayal by the emperor's overly ambitious son, Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix). Instead of accepting defeat, Maximus works his way up in the arena and swears vengeance, fighting against numerous foes to reach the very top and leave an important message for the emperor himself (with many onlookers).

The film is full of thunderous spectacles that are flawlessly choreographed battles between gladiators, perfectly complemented by a powerful score by Hans Zimmer . Crowe's commanding performance anchors the film, which traces his path to Commodus – and to revenge – in a way that will have viewers rooting for him until the very end. At this point, Gladiator is an essential revenge movie with a dramatic story that benefits from Scott's direction .

15 'Django Unchained' (2012)

Votes: 1.7 million | imdb rating: 8.5.

A fan-favorite Western directed by Quentin Tarantino , Django Unchained tells the story of the titular slave (played by Jamie Foxx ) who gains his freedom when he encounters a German bounty hunter, Dr. King Schultz ( Christoph Waltz ). The duo embarks on a dangerous journey across the country to look for Django's wife, Broomhilda ( Kerry Washington ), who is revealed to have been sold to a cruel plantation owner, Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio).

Widely regarded as one of Quentin Tarantino's best movies , Django Unchained is a modern masterpiece that is unflinching in its use of irreverent humor and stylistic violence to delve into racism and slavery. With stellar performances from its cast (most notably resulting in DiCaprio's glass scene) and no shortage of sharp dialogue, it's easy to see why the offbeat film became mainstream.

Django Unchained

14 'the lord of the rings: the two towers' (2002), votes: 1.8 million | imdb rating: 8.8.

It's hard to call any of director Peter Jackson 's The Lord of the Rings movies bad, but if fans had to pick the weakest entry in the trilogy, it would probably be The Two Towers . Picking up where the first movie left off, the film follows Frodo ( Elijah Wood ) and Sam's ( Sean Astin ) increasingly risky journey to Mordor, as well as Aragorn ( Viggo Mortensen ), Legolas ( Orlando Bloom ), and Gimli's ( John Rhys-Davies ) literally breathtaking pursuit of the Uruk-hai who have kidnapped the lovable duo Merry ( Dominic Monaghan ) and Pippin ( Billy Boyd ).

The epic LotR masterpiece does an excellent job of accomplishing the gargantuan task of bridging the two movies in an exciting enough way that leaves audiences wanting more, but not dissatisfied. One of its many highlights and arguably the best is its dramatic portrayal of the Battle of Helm's Deep, also called the Battle of the Hornburg, which sees some beloved characters up against impossible odds. Its high number of votes on IMDb is a testament to just how many people likely have this bookmarked as part of their annual marathons of the acclaimed film trilogy.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

13 'se7en' (1995), votes: 1.8 million | imdb rating: 8.6.

The twisty crime thriller to end all twisty crime thrillers, director David Fincher 's Se7en set a new standard and elevated the genre when it first premiered in the late 90s. The legendary film is centered on two detectives, the disillusioned William Somerset ( Morgan Freeman ) and his rookie partner David Mills (Brad Pitt). The detectives are assigned to a bizarre case about a serial killer using the seven deadly sins as inspiration for his gruesome yet meticulous murders.

Famous for its unforgettable twist ending , Se7en gives viewers an enthralling story with brilliantly suspenseful moments that build up to its wild conclusion . It was a surprisingly especially dark entry from Fincher, who established numerous trademarks in this film. Fantastic performances from Freeman and Pitt make the flawless material they have to work with even better. It's a movie that captured lightning in a bottle, and one that continues to be referenced, discussed, and studied today.

12 'The Dark Knight Rises' (2012)

Votes: 1.8 million | imdb rating: 8.4.

Set eight years after the events of The Dark Knight , director Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises is the gripping conclusion to his award-winning film trilogy. It depicts Gotham in a state of uncharacteristic peace thanks to the Dent Act, which is unsurprisingly soon disturbed by the iconic villain, Bane ( Tom Hardy ). Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) is forced to come out of retirement one last time to face this new threat, with the help of the reliable Commissioner Gordon ( Gary Oldman ) and an exciting new ally, Selina Kyle, a.k.a. Catwoman ( Anne Hathaway ).

A great example of a final movie done right, The Dark Knight Rises is a proper send-off for the beloved anti-hero , who's impossible not to root for at this point. Gotham's fate hangs in the balance as the caped crusader meets yet another foe. Of course, it's Tom Hardy's portrayal of the villainous Bane that manages to outshine heroic attempts from the protagonist, and will forever be associated with this massively successful trilogy.

The Dark Knight Rises

11 'the lord of the rings: the return of the king' (2003), votes: 2 million | imdb rating: 9.0.

The closer to Peter Jackson's trilogy of films adapting J.R.R. Tolkien 's seminal fantasy novels is blockbuster filmmaking done right. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King provides a satisfying conclusion to the nearly nine hours of story. This film sees Aragorn claim his birthright as the King of Gondor, possibly the most outstanding cavalry charge ever put to film, after an unbelievable struggle. It also includes the final leg of Frodo and Samwise's grueling journey towards the eventual destruction of the ring and the defeat of the big bad, Sauron.

This film holds a three-way tie for the most-awarded film in Oscars history, with Ben-Hur and Titanic all sharing the illustrious honor of taking home 11 awards. Perhaps as much an acknowledgment by the academy of the monumental achievement the trilogy as a whole was, The Return of the King also marked one of the rare times in history where the big winner was an epic, crowd-pleasing fantasy film .

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

10 'the lord of the rings: the fellowship of the ring' (2001), votes: 2 million | imdb rating: 8.9.

The task of adapting The Lord of the Rings trilogy that Tolkien spent most of his lifetime developing — and had a massive influence on the genre as a whole — was perhaps rightly seen as one that was, for all intents and purposes, impossible. However, Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema decided to take on the challenge — and it paid off.

Is the beginning of a tale better than the end? The internet certainly seems to think so, as The Fellowship of the Ring places above the conclusion to the trilogy. Why this is so is anyone's guess — but The Fellowship of the Ring is certainly an excellent, well-made film that does a great job of introducing the characters , their motivations, and the stakes of the story. It sees gorgeous depictions of the Shire, the creation of the Fellowship, and the first hints of the terrible antagonists they'll be facing along the way (including themselves). Among the three films, it's the most rewatchable, not just because it came first, but also due to the magical and nostalgic viewing experience it offers.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

9 'the godfather' (1972), votes: 2 million | imdb rating: 9.2.

Rarely does a film so completely transcend the medium's limits to become a staple of popular culture, but The Godfather is an odd confluence of factors. A niche Hollywood had thought dead, a young, maverick filmmaker with the vision to revitalize the gangster movie genre , and one of the best casts of all time combine to bring this all-time classic to life.

The Godfather portrays Mario Puzo 's mob novel on the big screen, depicting the life of the head of a mafia, Don Vito Corleone ( Marlon Brando ), as well as his reluctant son's – Michael ( Al Pacino ) – path to joining him and eventually taking control. It's mobster drama at its best, portraying the betrayals, violence, and familial conflicts, giving viewers a behind-the-scenes look at a compelling crime family. It's tough to find fault with this film — everything from the script to the production design, the cinematography, pacing, action, and acting are all top-notch. The Godfather gave viewers a glimpse into the inner workings of a mafia, which revolutionized an entire genre of filmmaking .

The Godfather (1972)

8 'the matrix' (1999), votes: 2.1 million | imdb rating: 8.7.

"What is the Matrix?" is a seemingly simple question, but one that perplexed and intrigued audiences as part of one of the most effective marketing campaigns in history. An odd combination of the height of stunt work, exciting new technologies, and philosophical contemplation of humanity's relationship with machines combined to make The Matrix a massive hit and a cultural phenomenon. It introduced the world to Keanu Reeves ' Neo, who could be the one that could save humanity from a grand illusion, at least according to Morpheus ( Laurence Fishburne ).

This film holds a special place in many people's hearts, and it's easy to see why. It changed the way blockbusters were made, introducing the world to bullet-time and revolutionary special effects, not to mention toe Keanu Reeves' acting chops as an action star. It's worth noting that it's still considered the best one in the Matrix franchise , and is still worth watching again today.

7 'Interstellar' (2014)

Another ambitious film from Nolan, Interstellar is considered one of the best sci-fi movies of all time . Set in a dystopian future where blight is causing the rapid decline of life on earth, the film focuses on a former pilot and now farmer named Cooper ( Matthew McConaughey ), who finds a secret NASA location and is soon placed in charge of a mission that could be humanity's last hope. As he leads his team through a wormhole, they don't expect what they find on the other side.

Interstellar hit every mark, from its stunning visual effects and commendable scientific accuracy to its outstanding performances and surprising emotional depth. Alongside its epic intergalactic story, it tells a more intimate father-daughter narrative that eventually influences Cooper's mission. Judging by its number of votes, it's safe to say that it is the movie for sci-fi fans who have likely gotten their dose of space, mind-bending physics, and dystopian settings on more than one rewatch.

Interstellar

6 'pulp fiction' (1994), votes: 2.2 million | imdb rating: 8.9.

Pulp Fiction is the film that cemented Quentin Tarantino as a creative force in Hollywood. It uses a non-linear narrative structure to depict a variety of arcs, which include two hitmen who have darkly humorous conversations, an actress who gets in trouble after a fun night out, and a Bonnie-and-Clyde-esque couple who hype themselves up for a robbery.

It's hard to put a finger on precisely what makes this film so good — an all-star cast trading barbs with each other from Tarantino's whip-smart script and playing with editing conventions to tell a non-linear story are two of the top reasons. But perhaps most of all, Pulp Fiction is just cool . There's no other word for it. From the stylish hitmen played with panache by Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta to the soundtrack of absolute bangers from start to finish, this film epitomized the mid-90s. It's one of the most influential American films of the decade.

Pulp Fiction

• The Shawshank Redemption

Screen Rant

The 10 movies with the most ratings on imdb, ranked by their score.

Your changes have been saved

Email is sent

Email has already been sent

Please verify your email address.

You’ve reached your account maximum for followed topics.

Peter Pan's Neverland Nightmare Trailer Reveals A Murderous & Child-Abducting Peter In New Poohniverse Movie

20 movies that francis ford coppola highly recommends you watch: "appreciation to the pictures that inspired me", india's record-breaking 2024 box office smash becomes global streaming hit in netflix debut.

The International Movie Database is one of the few websites that cinephiles visit to seek out great movies, but She-Hulk's review bombing has called the site's rating system into question . Internet trolls rated the new Disney+ show one star before the first episode had even aired, and people who don't keep up with movie and TV news would look at the score and believe the series is no good.

However, the IMDb scores are still a staple of the website, and users generally look to the top 250 list for new films. But the top 10 movies wouldn't necessarily be the same if it was based on how many users had voted. Between an influential sci-fi action movie and a satirical and bleak cult classic, these have more votes than the likes of The Godfather Part II , 12 Angry Men , and Schindler's List .

The Matrix (1999) - 8.7

Stream on hbo max.

Surprisingly, The Matrix is one of the 10 movies with the most ratings that aren't actually in IMDb's top 10 list. The Matrix was lightning in a bottle , as it arrived right at the start of the internet boom, and it's the rare cyberpunk movie that's still considered cool all these years later. 1.8 million users have rated the movie, but not everyone was into all the leather and wearing shades indoors.

The Matrix is arguably the most innovative action movie today and not even the 1999 film's sequels can rival it. It's also surprising that The Matrix Reloaded doesn't have as many votes, as it made almost double the original movie at the box office. But, then again. Reloaded certainly doesn't get as many repeat viewings.

The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring (2001) - 8.8

Stream on hbo max & amazon prime.

Nobody would have believed over 20 years ago that one of the most exciting movies of the 21st century would be about four friends walking and having a runtime of almost three hours. But that's exactly what The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is.

The 2001 movie is easily one of the biggest accomplishments ever when it comes to fantasy cinema. Even those who aren't fans of the genre still gravitate back to the classic, as 1.8 million IMDb users rated it. While some book scenes were impossible to adapt, such as the original council of Elrond and Aragon's original personality, outside of that, it's a completely faithful adaptation.

Forrest Gump (1994) - 8.8

Rent on apple tv.

Though Quentin Tarantino has become known for revising history, as Inglourious Basterds sees Adolf Hitler getting massacred and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood sees Sharon Tate surviving, Forrest Gump was the first to do it in such creative ways. The titular character inadvertently influenced the course of history, whether it was teaching Elvis his signature dance movie or being part of the Infantry Regiment in the Vietnam War.

While the film isn't in IMDb's top 10 movies, it only narrowly misses out, as it was voted on by two million users, who mostly love the seamless blend of fiction and historical events and the perfect mix of comedy and drama. And as there's a sequel to the novel, fans want to see Forrest Gump 2 .

Fight Club (1999) - 8.8

Stream on vudu.

Just like with Forrest Gump , Fight Club only just misses out on being in IMDb's top 10 movies, as it has an average rating of 8.8 based on over two million votes. Interestingly, the movie wasn't all that loved when it was first released 23 years ago, as critics didn't take kindly to its cynicism and it underperformed at the box office .

However, Fight Club was clearly way ahead of its time, and some obviously mistook its satire for sincerity. Everybody has their own theory about what the deep movie is about, but at the core of it, no other film has managed to examine the angst of Generation X better than the 1999 release. And, at the very least, it's the darkest and bleakest romantic comedy ever.

Inception (2010) - 8.8

Not a bad thing can be said about Christopher Nolan on IMDb, as even his worst movies have incredibly high average scores on the database. And even though Inception isn't on IMDb's top 10 movies list, it comes extremely close. The 2010 movie has an 8.8 based on over 2.3 million users, which is an incredible feat, but it's just another day in the office for Nolan.

What's even more impressive is that the director seemingly threw this out between The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises , making his unrivaled filmmaking look absolutely effortless. An envelope-pushing all-time great sci-fi action movie comes around once every decade or so, as Inception followed The Matrix by 11 years, but cinephiles have now been waiting 12 years for the next one.

Pulp Fiction (1994) - 8.9

As more years pass and Pulp Fiction is looked upon more and more as an all-time classic, the film will likely eventually reach that coveted 9.0 score, but for now, it has an 8.9 based on over two million votes. The non-linear narrative was so influential at the time, and though foreign filmmakers had been experimenting with the style for years, Tarantino was the one to popularize it in Hollywood.

Pulp Fiction is one of the few American films to have ever won the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival too. But accolades and influences aside, Pulp Fiction is simply such an entertaining and wild ride. However, there will always be a few users who rate it low, as Tarantino's extreme violence isn't for everyone, and some think that if the scenes were in chronological order, the magic would be lost entirely.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return Of The King (2003) - 9.0

2003's The Return of the King was the epic conclusion to the greatest fantasy movie series ever. And though the Hobbit trilogy followed a decade later to mixed results, not even those can tarnish the threequel's legacy. Even though they're completely different movies, The Return of the King was a huge influence on Avengers: Endgame .

The movie was clearly something of a blueprint for the Marvel film and a guide on how to perfectly conclude multiple different storylines. As the Middle-Earth universe is returning with the Amazon Prime Video series, The Rings of Power , it'll be interesting to see how that ultimately affects the perception of the 2003 movie. However, early responses to the TV show are overwhelmingly positive.

The Dark Knight (2008) - 9.0

There have been countless iterations and reboots of The Caped Crusader, and while fans can debate forever over which actor is the best Batman and which movie has the best depiction of Gotham, there's no denying that The Dark Knight is the ultimate Batman movie. The movie makes some strange choices that are absolutely not Batman-like, such as Bruce Wayne operating in a brightly lit garage instead of a cave, and half of the movie is set during the day. Some fans might even argue that it's more of a Christopher Nolan movie than a Batman movie.

Nevertheless, the film features the greatest face-off between Batman and the Joker. And even though it makes some surprising choices for a Batman movie, the bleakness and tragedy of it all are what makes it an incredible Batman film, and that's why it has an average of 9.0 based on over 2.6 million votes.

The Godfather (1974) - 9.2

Stream on paramount+.

While one movie on the database is rated higher than the gangster movie, The Godfather is often named the greatest movie of all time. Before the 1972 release, mobster movies were hammy and over the top, but director Francis Ford Coppola flipped the genre on its head and delivered the most daring, dramatic, and bold film of its time.

However, there are still some cinephiles sitting on it, as, despite its incredible reputation, 1.8 million votes isn't all that much, especially when most of the other movies have way over two million ratings. And, interestingly, The Godfather Part II is only the 30th most rated movie on the database. So while the first movie is one of the highest rated, there must be quite a few armchair critics of the classic, as there was a significant drop off with the sequel.

The Shawshank Redemption (1994) - 9.3

1994's The Shawshank Redemption is one of those movies that are rated so high because seemingly nobody vehemently dislikes it. The film is a compelling prison drama with a mystery and such an uplifting ending, and that kind of movie pleases everyone and there's no way anybody can hate it.

However, it'd be interesting to see what score the 1994 release would have if it stuck to the original ending. The final scene where Red and Andy meet on the beach was only added after bad test screenings. It originally ended with Red not knowing if he'd ever find Andy as the bus drives into the distance. It's almost like if Toy Story 3 ended before the toys are saved from the incinerator.

NEXT: 10 Best Movies That Flopped At The Box Office, According To Reddit

Log in or sign up for Rotten Tomatoes

Trouble logging in?

By continuing, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and to receive email from the Fandango Media Brands .

By creating an account, you agree to the Privacy Policy and the Terms and Policies , and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes.

Email not verified

Let's keep in touch.

Sign up for the Rotten Tomatoes newsletter to get weekly updates on:

• Upcoming Movies and TV shows
• Rotten Tomatoes Podcast
• Media News + More

By clicking "Sign Me Up," you are agreeing to receive occasional emails and communications from Fandango Media (Fandango, Vudu, and Rotten Tomatoes) and consenting to Fandango's Privacy Policy and Terms and Policies . Please allow 10 business days for your account to reflect your preferences.

OK, got it!

• About Rotten Tomatoes®
• Login/signup

Movies in theaters

• Opening This Week
• Top Box Office
• Coming Soon to Theaters
• Certified Fresh Movies

Movies at Home

• Fandango at Home
• Prime Video
• Most Popular Streaming Movies
• What to Watch New

Certified fresh picks

• 73% Blink Twice Link to Blink Twice
• 96% Strange Darling Link to Strange Darling
• 86% Between the Temples Link to Between the Temples

New TV Tonight

• 96% Only Murders in the Building: Season 4
• 92% The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power: Season 2
• 95% Terminator Zero: Season 1
• 68% Kaos: Season 1
• 83% City of God: The Fight Rages On: Season 1
• -- Here Come the Irish: Season 1
• -- K-Pop Idols: Season 1
• -- Horror's Greatest: Season 1
• -- After Baywatch: Moment in the Sun: Season 1

Most Popular TV on RT

• 100% Dark Winds: Season 2
• 92% Bad Monkey: Season 1
• 78% Star Wars: The Acolyte: Season 1
• 100% Pachinko: Season 2
• Best TV Shows
• Most Popular TV

Certified fresh pick

• 92% The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power: Season 2 Link to The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power: Season 2
• All-Time Lists
• Binge Guide
• Comics on TV
• Five Favorite Films
• Video Interviews
• Weekend Box Office
• Weekly Ketchup
• What to Watch

The Best Shows on Amazon Prime Video to Watch Right Now (August 2024)

100 Best Netflix Series To Watch Right Now (August 2024)

What to Watch: In Theaters and On Streaming

Awards Tour

TV Premiere Dates 2024

Your Full List of All Upcoming Marvel Movies — With Key Details!

• Trending on RT
• Beetlejuice Beetlejuice
• Rings of Power S2 First Reviews
• Venice Film Festival
• Fall Horror Movie Preview

Wizards Beyond Waverly Place premieres October 29 on Disney+

The Rings of Power Season 2 First Reviews

"Riveting, captivating, a spectacular triumph"

What to Watch this Week

Only Murders , Rings of Power : Our recs for what to watch in theaters and at home

Venice 2024: 8 Movies That Will Make the Film Fest

All eyes on Beetlejuice Beetlejuice , Joker: Folie A Deux , new Luca Guadagnino, Wolfs , Nicole Kidman erotic drama

Venice Film Festival Red Carpet Arrivals

See the biggest stars with our gallery of the 81st Venice Film Festival

Upcoming Marvel Movies

New photos from Thunderbolts , Ironheart , and more

Edgar Wright Surprises Shaun of the Dead Superfans

Video: Everyone's celebrating the anniversary of Shaun of the Dead

The Rings of Power Cast on What They Fear Most About Sauron

Plus, their favorite episode from season 2

Shaun of the Dead 20th Anniversary

The zombie comedy is back in theaters

Everything Streaming in August

The Fall Guy is now streaming on Peacock

New & Now In Theaters

WATCH AT HOME

Popular streaming movies.

• Longlegs 86%
• Ghostlight 100%
• Borderlands 10%
• Twisters 75%
• Hit Man 95%
• Kinds of Kindness 72%
• Incoming 26%
• A Quiet Place: Day One 86%
• The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power 92%
• Terminator Zero 95%
• Kevin Can F**k Himself 91%
• Dark Winds 100%
• Bad Monkey 92%
• Star Wars: The Acolyte 78%
• Only Murders in the Building 96%
• A Discovery of Witches 87%
• Pachinko 100%

Coming Soon To Theaters

Latest certified fresh movies & tv, new reviews added, new tv this week.

• City of God: The Fight Rages On 83%
• Adam Sandler: Love You 83%
• Here Come the Irish - -
• K-Pop Idols - -
• Horror's Greatest - -
• After Baywatch: Moment in the Sun - -

Top 10 Box Office

• Deadpool & Wolverine 78%
• Alien: Romulus 80%
• It Ends With Us 58%
• Blink Twice 73%
• The Forge - -
• Coraline 91%
• The Crow 21%
• Despicable Me 4 56%
• Inside Out 2 91%

Trailers & Videos

On the street.

Asking strangers at Comic-Con what's the best thing they've watched this summer

Edgar Wright's Shaun of the Dead

Meet the journalist who wrote the book on Shaun of the Dead and a father-daughter duo who got the surprise of a lifetime.

LotR: The Rings of Power

The cast on what their characters fear most about Sauron

The Rings of Power , Only Murders , and More

Our recommendations for what to watch in theaters and at home this week

Sonic the Hedgehog 3

Keanu Reeves' Shadow takes on Sonic, Knuckles, and Tails in the first trailer

Movie & TV guides

Verified Hot Movies

Discover What to Watch

Best Movies of All Time

Subscribe to the PwC Newsletter

Join the community, edit dataset, edit dataset tasks.

Some tasks are inferred based on the benchmarks list.

Add a Data Loader

Remove a data loader.

• huggingface/datasets -
• tensorflow/datasets -
• pytorch/text -

Edit Dataset Modalities

Edit dataset languages, edit dataset variants.

The benchmarks section lists all benchmarks using a given dataset or any of its variants. We use variants to distinguish between results evaluated on slightly different versions of the same dataset. For example, ImageNet 32⨉32 and ImageNet 64⨉64 are variants of the ImageNet dataset.

Add a new evaluation result row

Imdb movie reviews.

The IMDb Movie Reviews dataset is a binary sentiment analysis dataset consisting of 50,000 reviews from the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) labeled as positive or negative. The dataset contains an even number of positive and negative reviews. Only highly polarizing reviews are considered. A negative review has a score ≤ 4 out of 10, and a positive review has a score ≥ 7 out of 10. No more than 30 reviews are included per movie. The dataset contains additional unlabeled data.

Benchmarks Edit Add a new result Link an existing benchmark

Dataset Loaders Edit Add Remove

Similar Datasets

License edit, modalities edit, languages edit.

IMDb vs Rotten Tomatoes: Which Ratings Should You Trust?

It has been age old debate among movie fans: which rating system should you trust more? IMDb or Rotten Tomatoes? While both the sites have their own devoted group of fan following, today I am going to take stance and try to argue in favor of IMDb. As with any constructive discussion, you are free to disagree, but before that hear out my argument.

Understanding the Ratings

Let’s first begin by understanding how scores are awarded on IMDb as compared to Rotten Tomatoes. I’d assume that all of you know that IMDb is completely user-driven, ratings of all films depend solely on average users who just go the website and rate movies they’ve watched. Due to this fact, you’d expect there to be some really extreme ratings, especially from a person or a group of people who ‘hate’ a particular film for no reason whatsoever or just like to randomly give low ratings to films. IMDb is wise to this, however, and has introduced a weighted rating system for the movies in their top 250 list. I’m not going to bore you with the formula and the concept of the ‘Bayesian estimate’ they use to calculate their rating but let me simplify it for you. Not all votes by users on IMDb have the same weightage. Users who rate more films and generally rate a film closer to its average are given more preference in the ‘weighted average’ score IMDb calculates. This moderation method has proved successful for IMDb over the years.

Rotten Tomatoes is a critics-powered site. The opinion of the average cinema-goer is not taken into account. If the critics like the film, the film gets a fresh rating (above 60%) or else it is doomed to rot in the rotten category. This rating is a general average of the ratings from all the critics registered with the site. There are a few prerequisites to become a critic with Rotten Tomatoes, which include being a writer for a  major media organisation. Now I’m not going to rant about the bias of film critics or cook up conspiracy theories about critics being paid to give good reviews. I’ll simply ask you this, should the opinion of around 200 people be considered over the opinion of more than 1 million people?

Now you may argue, ‘these 200 people have devoted their life to reviewing films, they make their living out of watching and rating new releases, shouldn’t we trust them more?’ This is definitely a valid point. Most of the films that we consider among the greatest of all-time usually receive very high scores on Rotten Tomatoes. Let’s take the example of ‘The Godfather’. With a 99% score on RT, this classic has definitely received the rating it deserved.

However, this article is written for the average cinema-goer. It’s written for you. Most of you don’t care about production design, editing or directing, as long as you’re delivered a brilliant film as a whole. You love a film like ‘Home Alone’, a timeless classic, a film you grew up watching, a film that had you rolling down the aisles with laughter, one of the few good Hollywood films that you could watch with your entire family. Also, a film which happens to be rated rotten at 55% on Rotten Tomatoes! Surprised? How could this be possible? This reinforces my point about how RT ratings do not cater to the average audience.

Before we delve into the subject deeper, let’s understand IMDb ratings more clearly. One of the disadvantages of IMDb ratings is that they have no clear ‘boundary line’ drawn between rotten and fresh unlike Rotten Tomatoes. So, here’s a simple system I’ve come up with after some careful research and calculation:

>9.0: Only 3 films exist above a 9 rating. ‘The Shawshank Redemption’, The Godfather’ and ‘The Godfather II’. I’d suppose no one will raise a voice if I were to count these among the best movies ever made.

8.0-9.0: The rest, i.e. 247 films, in the top 250 list on IMDb fall under this category. Only an elite category of movies receive a rating higher than 8 on IMDb and these films should be considered great (of course, there are exceptions as we point out here ).

7.5-8.0:  Again, most, if not all, films that have ratings higher than 7.5 should be considered good. I’m yet to see a film which is rated above 7.5 and was really bad.

7.0-7.5: I’d say that 7 is some sort of invisible barrier for IMDb films, movies which cross this barrier are definitely worth at least one watch.

6.0-7.0: This is where things get a little tricky. Most of the films in this bracket are average. But there also many films that are actually great, but have been rated low due to odd reasons. (We handpicked some of these films here ). Overall, you can certainly take a chance with films in this bracket. You could end up discovering an underrated gem.

4.0-6.0: Below average movies. Don’t watch any of dramas in this rating range if you value your time. Some comedies in this bracket, however are watchable. Watch at your own peril.

0-4 Stay away from this category. I cannot single out a single good film in this category. Only true boredom can force you to watch a film from this rating range.

Now that we’ve cleared that up, let’s discuss another movie that Rotten Tomatoes completely got wrong. The curious case of ‘Sharknado’. The longest running ‘joke’ on Rotten Tomatoes happens to be rated fresh at 82% on RT. If you aren’t familiar with the film, give it one watch and you’ll know what I’m talking about. Were the critics who rated this film, which happens to be 3.3 on IMDb, acting under the influence of some dare? I mean, surely, no one in their right frame of mind, especially someone who watches movies for a living, can sit through the entire duration of ‘Sharknado’, let alone rate it as a great film?

I agree, that if you look, you’ll find some movies that have average ratings (6.0-7.0) on IMDb but are actually pretty good films. In fact, with the number of movies made, it’s impossible to find quite a number of cases where IMDb got it wrong. Bear in mind, however, I do not claim that IMDb has some ‘perfect’ rating system. I am merely stating that IMDb ratings are more trustworthy than Rotten Tomatoes’ ratings.

Let’s compare the two to a real world model. We are familiar with the systems of government. If IMDb ratings were comparable to a system of government, they’d be a democracy. Rotten Tomatoes on the other hand, adopts a system of constitutional monarchy. These comparisons may sound ridiculous, but think about it. Quite simply, IMDb lets the common man vote. Rotten Tomatoes has an elite group of individuals voting for their ‘king’. I really would like a democratic system formed by a number of people with similar characteristics to myself to help me choose which movie to watch.

IMDb has added ‘Metascore’ (from the second most used review aggregating site similar to the Rotten Tomatoes). As a matter of fact, Rotten Tomatoes also has an added feature of a ‘audience score’. However, these sites do not give as much importance to these scores (No one spoke about the audience score for BvS!) as they do to their primary scores. The only thing which makes movies a box office success is how much the audience gets entertained. IMDb recognises this fact, by allowing this very audience to rate the film.

My Personal Algorithm

I’m on a quest to watch atleast 50% of all the movies made in history. Definitely an uphill task, but what makes it more difficult, is choosing which film to watch. I sometimes spend more time on IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes analysing summaries and comparing ratings just to decide which movie is going to be worth my time. Over the years, I’ve developed an algorithm to help me decide which film to watch.

For thrillers, I pick them only if they have a rating of above 6 on IMDb AND a rating of above 45% on Rotten Tomatoes.

For dramas, I pick them only if they have a rating of above 6.5 on IMDb AND  a rating of above 50% on Rotten Tomatoes.

For action films, I am a little bit more liberal, allowing a rating of above 5.5 on IMDb and above 35% on Rotten Tomatoes.

For pure comedies, I ignore ratings altogether and choose based on the story line or the cast. I’ve come to realise that when it comes to comedy, the entire audience acts like a film critic and doesn’t rate films based on entertainment factor. The same is true for horror films. For some strange reason, they are rated low on IMDb — even though we know that horror is amongst the most popular genre of films.

So, the next time when you’re on RT, trying to decide between two movies, please do take a look at their IMDb ratings too. They say a lot more about how much you will like the film.

Read More: Arrival Ending, Explained

SPONSORED LINKS

• Movie Explainers
• TV Explainers

Movie Reviews

2. It Chapter Two

4. Dolemite Is My Name

6. The Hustle

7. Deadwood: The Movie

8. The Ron Clark Story

9. Colorado Territory

10. Wichita

11. Along the Great Divide

12. Way Out West

13. The Idle Rich

14. The Bishop Murder Case

16. Battleship

17. Battle Los Angeles

18. In Time

21. Pandorum

22. Babylon A.D.

23. Rebellion

24. Pathfinder

25. Immortals

More to explore, recently viewed.

Navigation Menu

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests..., provide feedback.

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly.

To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation .

• Notifications You must be signed in to change notification settings

IMDB Dataset of 50K Movie Reviews

nijatmammadov/review-classification-nlp

Folders and files.

Repository files navigation

About Dataset IMDB dataset having 50K movie reviews for natural language processing or Text analytics. This is a dataset for binary sentiment classification containing substantially more data than previous benchmark datasets. We provide a set of 25,000 highly polar movie reviews for training and 25,000 for testing. So, predict the number of positive and negative reviews using either classification or deep learning algorithms.

• Jupyter Notebook 100.0%

• Español – América Latina
• Português – Brasil
• Tiếng Việt

TFDS now supports the Croissant 🥐 format ! Read the documentation to know more.

imdb_reviews

• Description :

Large Movie Review Dataset. This is a dataset for binary sentiment classification containing substantially more data than previous benchmark datasets. We provide a set of 25,000 highly polar movie reviews for training, and 25,000 for testing. There is additional unlabeled data for use as well.

Additional Documentation : Explore on Papers With Code north_east

Homepage : http://ai.stanford.edu/~amaas/data/sentiment/

Source code : tfds.datasets.imdb_reviews.Builder

• 1.0.0 (default): New split API ( https://tensorflow.org/datasets/splits )

Download size : 80.23 MiB

Auto-cached ( documentation ): Yes

Supervised keys (See as_supervised doc ): ('text', 'label')

Figure ( tfds.show_examples ): Not supported.

imdb_reviews/plain_text (default config)

Config description : Plain text

Dataset size : 129.83 MiB

Feature structure :

• Feature documentation :

• Examples ( tfds.as_dataframe ):

imdb_reviews/bytes

Config description : Uses byte-level text encoding with tfds.deprecated.text.ByteTextEncoder

Dataset size : 129.88 MiB

imdb_reviews/subwords8k

Config description : Uses tfds.deprecated.text.SubwordTextEncoder with 8k vocab size

Dataset size : 54.72 MiB

imdb_reviews/subwords32k

Config description : Uses tfds.deprecated.text.SubwordTextEncoder with 32k vocab size

Dataset size : 50.33 MiB

Except as otherwise noted, the content of this page is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License , and code samples are licensed under the Apache 2.0 License . For details, see the Google Developers Site Policies . Java is a registered trademark of Oracle and/or its affiliates.

Last updated 2022-12-10 UTC.

IMDb TV Review: Everything To Know About the Free Streaming Service

• Streaming TV

Editor’s note: IMDb TV is now Amazon Freevee. You can read our full review here .

While the on-demand streaming market is flooded with subscription products, IMDb TV takes a different approach.

The popular website IMDb, which is short for Internet Movie Database, has become more than a place to look up the filmography of your favorite actor or check the reviews of the latest box office release.

Now owned by tech-giant Amazon, IMDb has joined the world of streaming content. It is offering movies and TV shows for free on a platform called IMDb TV .

Table of Contents

What is imdb tv.

• How To Watch IMDb TV
• Content Available on IMDb TV

User Experience for IMDb TV

• Final Thoughts

ABOUT THIS REVIEW: Team Clark loves the word “free,” especially when it involves legally streaming TV shows and movies. We decided that we should check out the IMDb TV service and see if it’s something Clark.com users might enjoy.

For the purposes of this review, I signed up for the service and downloaded the necessary components to watch on my phone, tablet, television, streaming devices and computer. I then took a “test drive” of the service on all of those devices. I came away with some interesting notes to share.

This review is one of many we conducted as a part of our free streaming TV series . You can learn more about our strategies for getting free streaming TV here:

IMDb TV is a free on-demand streaming service that is attached to the Internet Movie Database website and app. There’s no monthly subscription fee, so as you might expect, there are commercials.

While IMDb’s roots are in a fan-based website, the brand was purchased by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and transformed into a mainstream way to access information on film and television. This streaming branch of that operation is integrated into the same app and website that provides movie reviews, ratings, filmographies and even movie showtimes at your local theater.

How to Watch IMDb TV

While the IMDb TV service may be free, that doesn’t mean you’ll get away without signing up for the service.

Sign Up Is Required

If you’d like to enjoy the free streaming from IMDb, you have to create an account on the website. You are able to sign up with an email address, Amazon, Facebook or Google account.

That’s annoying, I know, but there is some upside to being signed into their site while streaming. You will be able to create a watchlist, submit IMDb ratings on the content you view and get recommendations on shows or movies that may be of interest to you based on previous viewing habits.

Of course, the benefit to this for IMDb is that it’s able to track your viewership and better tailor advertisements for its partners.

Devices and Apps

The good news? You’ll be able to watch IMDb TV from your phone, tablet, television, computer or most any other streaming device. The bad news? Depending on the method you’re using, there may be some adjustments necessary.

IMDb TV has an app that is available on phones and tablets on both iOS and Android devices. If you download this mobile app, you’ll be able to sign in and watch straight from a device.

It also is available through Amazon Prime Video and Amazon Fire TV for television streaming. The easiest way to determine what you need for television streaming is this:

• If you have an Amazon Fire TV Stick, the IMDb TV content will be integrated into that format since IMDb is owned by Amazon.
• If you are using a different streaming device, such as a Roku, you will need to download the Amazon Prime Video app to access IMDb TV. It does not have a standalone Roku channel, for example.

Content Available To Stream on IMDb TV

The content selection on IMDb TV is quite good for a service without any subscription fees.

There are mainstream movies that feature big stars like Brad Pitt, Jack Nicholson and Bill Murray. There also are TV shows like Perry Mason or Malcolm in the Middle. Content rotates on and off the service, so you may want to watch quickly if you find something you like.

It also appears that the connection with Amazon Prime Video may offer the opportunity for some content to rotate onto IMDb TV for limited-time free streaming. For instance, the service was featuring thrillers like Shutter Island and Zodiac in honor of Halloween in October and offered holiday-specific movies in December.

• Popular Movies

While you may not have access to new releases with this service, you will be able to see some critically acclaimed films and actors.

The available movie titles rotate often, but here are just a few of the films I found when I researched this article:

• Little Miss Sunshine
• Horton Hears A Who
• What Happens in Vegas
• Good Morning, Vietnam
• Nacho Libre
• Surf’s Up
• Donnie Darko

Films such as The Shining, La La Land and Apocalypse Now have previously been featured on the service.

• Popular TV Series

I was pleasantly surprised at the number of television series I recognized. No, you’re not going to get the latest and greatest hits from the small screen, but you are going to find some name brands free of charge. Shows like Mad Men, 24, Lost and Malcolm in the Middle were all hits during their runtime.

Here’s a sampling of the TV series available for streaming at the time of this article:

• Malcolm in the Middle
• I Dream of Jeannie
• Little House on the Prarie
• Schitt’s Creek
• Desperate Housewives
• All in the Family

The Middle, First 48 and Gilligan’s Island are some TV shows that previously were available on IMDb TV.

Original Content

The selection of original content has improved dramatically for IMDb TV over the last couple of years, which is a good sign for streamers in 2022 and beyond.

The service has amassed enough original content to make its own tab on the app.

Here’s a sampling of the available original content:

• Luke Bryan: My Dirt Road Diary
• Judy Justice
• Uniterrupted’s Top Class
• Timewasters
• Moment of Truth
• Pretty Hard Cases

Live Streaming on IMDb TV

One of the more recent additions to IMDb TV is the presence of a live TV tab on the app. But when you see that, don’t get carried away with excitement.

This tab does not unlock free access to your favorite local or cable TV channels. Instead, it features live streams of old episodes of TV shows and movies that are categorized by genre.

For example, you could catch a live streaming episode of the popular show The First 48 on the “Crime 360” themed channel. Or you could watch channels that are dedicated to old TV shows like Baywatch or Gordon Ramsey’s Kitchen Nightmares.

Now that you know what content you can find on the service, I wanted to give you a better idea of what the user experience is like. Let’s talk about the advertisements you’ll endure, the user interface and some tips for IMDb TV consumption.

How Bad Are the Ads?

The commercial breaks were typically 90 seconds at a time. My experience was often four advertisements per break, with the commercials alternating between 15- and 30-second spots.

Here’s a look at the advertisement distribution for a movie that had a run time of just over two hours.

I marked the seven advertisement breaks with red circles.

For your typical half-hour television shows, I noticed that the experience varied a little bit. I experienced anywhere from two commercial breaks to none at all. Here was the most common, which is a singular break in the middle of the show.

The hour-long television show looked more like this, with three breaks included.

When viewing original content, I noticed that much of it was without advertising. I was able to watch full episodes of the animated shorts, such as You’re Not a Monster, without seeing a commercial.

User Interface

I was very impressed with the simplicity and ease of the user interface. It was not cluttered with ads or promotions as you might expect from a free website. In fact, I saw no advertisements at all on the menu pages via mobile or internet-based browsing.

The menu is broken down by genres and categories. Movies and TV shows were listed separately, but are mixed together as options on the menu. Here’s a look at the default home screen menu:

It is incredibly easy to swipe through each category on your phone or tablet (use your remote or mouse on TV and computer). If you cannot find what you’re looking for, the search bar is readily available on both the app and the site. The content category breakdowns are as follows:

• Recently Added Movies
• Recently Added TV
• Movies of the Week
• IMDb Originals
• Hidden Gems
• Chills and Thrills
• Action and Adventure
• Date Night Picks
• Documentaries
• Movies for the Whole Family

Tips for Enjoying IMDb TV

Has some of the content caught your attention? Here are some tips for enjoying it on IMDb TV:

• Save the password on your device: If you’re planning to use the app as your primary source of streaming for IMDb TV, I suggest saving your password. I tried not doing that, and was asked to login to my account often upon re-opening the app.
• Rate movies and shows after viewing: The fun part of streaming content on a site known best for its reviews and ratings for content is that you get to be an active participant in the process. There is no better time to rate a show or movie than when it is fresh on your mind. The integration makes it easy to be a valued contributor.
• Use the “Recommendations” tab: Since IMDb TV is going to be tracking the content you watch no matter what, you may as well see the benefits of it. Swiping over to the recommended tab will identify shows and movies that may be a good fit based on the type of content you have watched. Be warned, sometimes the content it suggests is not available for free on IMDb TV and instead it is suggesting a rental from Amazon Prime Video. That can be annoying, especially if you don’t already use Prime Video.

Final Thoughts on IMDb TV

Still trying to decide whether or not you should add IMDb TV to your streaming portfolio? Here are some pros and cons to think over:

IMDb TV: Pros and Cons

Bottom Line

After using IMDb TV for a bit, I was searching for the right way to describe the experience. It reminds me of watching a non-premium, antenna-based television network — but with the luxury of being able to watch on demand and take it on the go with several devices. If you’re looking for a Netflix substitute, you’re likely to be disappointed. If you’re looking for a free way to enjoy some quality content, I don’t think you can go wrong.

Do you have experience watching the IMDb TV streaming service? We’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below!

More Clark.com Stories You May Like: 

• Best Live TV Streaming Plans and Deals Right Now  
• Cut the Cord: 4 Things You Need To Stream TV on a Budget
• Cable vs. Streaming: Does Cutting the Cord Really Save You Money?

Our Daily Newsletter

Join more than 340,000 people who get our must-have money tips every day

Watch / Listen

Check out our top-rated money podcast.

Need money help? Call us for free advice . You can also email us .

Matt Reeves ’ “The Batman” isn’t a superhero movie. Not really. All the trappings are there: the Batmobile, the rugged suit, the gadgets courtesy of trusty butler Alfred. And of course, at the center, is the Caped Crusader himself: brooding, tormented, seeking his own brand of nighttime justice in a Gotham City that’s spiraling into squalor and decay.

But in Reeves’ confident hands, everything is breathtakingly alive and new. As director and co-writer, he’s taken what might seem like a familiar tale and made it epic, even operatic. His “ Batman ” is more akin to a gritty, ‘70s crime drama than a soaring and transporting blockbuster. With its kinetic, unpredictable action, it calls to mind films like “ The Warriors ” as well as one of the greatest of them all in the genre, “ The French Connection .” And with a series of high-profile murders driving the plot, it sometimes feels as if the Zodiac killer is terrorizing the citizens of Gotham.

And yet, despite these touchstones, this is unmistakably a Matt Reeves film. He accomplishes here what he did with his gripping entries in the “Planet of the Apes” franchise: created an electrifying, entertaining spectacle, but one that’s grounded in real, emotional stakes. This is a Batman movie that’s aware of its own place within pop culture, but not in winking, meta fashion; rather, it acknowledges the comic book character’s lore, only to examine it and reinvent it in a way that’s both substantial and daring. The script from Reeves and Peter Craig forces this hero to question his history as well as confront his purpose, and in doing so, creates an opening for us as viewers to challenge the narratives we cling to in our own lives.

And with Robert Pattinson taking over the role of Bruce Wayne, we have an actor who’s not just prepared but hungry to explore this figure’s weird, dark instincts. This is not the dashing heir to a fortune prowling about, kicking ass in a cool costume. This is Travis Bickle in the Batsuit, detached and disillusioned. He’s two years into his tenure as Batman, tracking criminals from on high in Wayne Tower—an inspired switch from the usual sprawl of Wayne Manor, suggesting an even greater isolation from society. “They think I’m hiding in the shadows,” he intones in an opening voiceover. “But I am the shadows.” In the harsh light of day, Pattinson gives us hungover indie rock star vibes. But at night, you can see the rush he gets from swooping in and executing his version of vengeance, even beneath the tactical gear and eye black.

As he’s shown in pretty much every role he’s taken since “Twilight” made him a global superstar in 2008, working with singular auteurs from David Cronenberg to Claire Denis to the Safdie brothers, Pattinson is at his best when he’s playing characters who make you uncomfortable. Even more than Christian Bale in the role, Pattinson is so skilled at making his beautiful, angular features seem unsettling. So when he first spies on the impossibly sexy Zoe Kravitz as Selina Kyle, slinking into her leather motorcycle gear and shimmying down the fire escape in her own pursuit of nocturnal justice, there’s an unmistakable flicker of a charge in his eyes: Ooh. She’s a freak like me.

Pattinson and Kravitz have insane chemistry with each other. She is his match, physically and emotionally, every step of the way. This is no flirty, purring Catwoman: She’s a fighter and a survivor with a loyal heart and a strong sense of what’s right. Following her lead role in Steven Soderbergh ’s high-tech thriller “Kimi,” Kravitz continues to reveal a fierce charisma and quiet strength.

She’s part of a murderer’s row of supporting performers, all of whom get meaty roles to play. Jeffrey Wright is the rare voice of idealism and decency as the eventual Commissioner Gordon. John Turturro is low-key chilling as crime boss Carmine Falcone. Andy Serkis —Caesar in Reeves’ “Apes” movies—brings a paternal wisdom and warmth as Alfred. Colin Farrell is completely unrecognizable as the sleazy, villainous Oswald Cobblepot, better known as The Penguin. And Paul Dano is flat-out terrifying as The Riddler, whose own drive for vengeance provides the story’s spine. He goes to extremes here in a way that’s reminiscent of his startling work in “ There Will Be Blood .” His derangement is so intense, you may find yourself unexpectedly laughing just to break the tension he creates. But there’s nothing amusing about his portrayal; Dano makes you feel as if you’re watching a man who’s truly, deeply disturbed.

This is not to say that “The Batman” is a downer; far from it. Despite the overlong running time of nearly three hours, this is a film that’s consistently viscerally gripping. The coolest Batmobile yet—a muscular vehicle that’s straight out of “ Mad Max: Fury Road ”—figures prominently in one of the movie’s most heart-pounding sequences. It’s an elaborate car chase and chain-reaction crash ending with an upside-down shot of fiery fury that literally had me applauding during my screening. During a fight at a thumping night club, punctuated by pulsating red lights, you can feel every punch and kick. (That’s one of the more compelling elements of seeing this superhero in his early days: He isn’t invincible.) And a shootout in a pitch-black hallway, illuminated only by the blasts of shotgun fire, is both harrowing and dazzling. Greatly magnifying the power of scenes like these is the score from veteran composer Michael Giacchino . Best known for his Pixar movie music, he does something totally different with “The Batman”: percussive and horn-heavy, it is massive and demanding, and you will feel it deep in your core.

Working with artists and craftspeople operating at the top of their game, Reeves has made a movie that manages to be ethereal yet weighty at the same time, substantial yet impressionistic. Cinematographer Greig Fraser pulls off the same sort of stunning magic trick he did with his Oscar-nominated work in Denis Villeneuve ’s “Dune”: Through pouring rain and neon lights, there’s both a gauziness and a heft to his imagery. His use of shadow and silhouette is masterful, and does so much to convey a sense of foreboding and tension. I could write an entire, separate essay on the film’s many uses of the color red to suggest energy, danger, even hope. And the costume design from the great Jacqueline Durran —with Dave Crossman and Glyn Dillon designing Pattinson’s rough-and-tumble Batsuit—put just the right finishing touch on the film’s cool, edgy vibe.

This is the most beautiful Batman movie you’ve ever seen—even if it’s not really a Batman movie at all.

Christy Lemire

Christy Lemire is a longtime film critic who has written for RogerEbert.com since 2013. Before that, she was the film critic for The Associated Press for nearly 15 years and co-hosted the public television series “Ebert Presents At the Movies” opposite Ignatiy Vishnevetsky, with Roger Ebert serving as managing editor. Read her answers to our Movie Love Questionnaire here .

• Robert Pattinson as Bruce Wayne / Batman
• Zoë Kravitz as Selina Kyle
• Paul Dano as The Riddler
• Jeffrey Wright as Lt. James Gordon
• John Turturro as Carmine Falcone
• Peter Sarsgaard as District Attorney Gil Colson
• Andy Serkis as Alfred Pennyworth
• Colin Farrell as Oz / The Penguin

Writer (Batman created by)

• Bill Finger

Cinematographer

• Greig Fraser

Costume Designer

• Jacqueline Durran
• Matt Reeves
• Peter Craig
• Michael Giacchino
• Tyler Nelson
• William Hoy

Leave a comment

Now playing.

Merchant Ivory

The Deliverance

City of Dreams

Out Come the Wolves

Seeking Mavis Beacon

Across the River and Into the Trees

You Gotta Believe

Latest articles.

“Risky Business” Remains One of the Most Daring Films of the ’80s

Venice Film Festival 2024: Separated, Maria, Kill the Jockey, One to One: John & Yoko

Experience the Star Trek Movies in 70mm at Out of this World L.A. Event

Home Entertainment Guide: August 2024

The best movie reviews, in your inbox.

Advertisement

Supported by

‘1992’ Review: Can They Get Along?

The uproar that followed the verdict handed down in the police beating of Rodney King serves as a mere backdrop for fathers and sons to work out their issues in a heist thriller.

• Share full article

By Ben Kenigsberg

The Los Angeles riots ultimately amount to little more than a plot device in “1992,” a rote heist thriller that tosses in a double dose of father-son melodrama. Or maybe the paternal bonding has been grafted on to the caper. Either way, nothing in the foreground of this hacky effort, directed by Ariel Vromen, is as interesting as what is happening in the backdrop — which is to say, the verdict handed down in the police beating of Rodney King and its aftermath.

Mercer (Tyrese Gibson) is a former gang member six months out of prison and now the sole custodian of his teenage son, Antoine (Christopher A’mmanuel), who resents him for not having been around. With the verdict set to be announced, Mercer wants Antoine to come straight home from school. Things “might get a little crazy out there today,” he says. Antoine doesn’t exactly listen; Mercer, searching for him that evening, catches up with Antoine right after he has thrown an object through a shop window. Later, the two are subject to a racist traffic stop in one of the film’s few potent scenes.

Separately, the uproar that follows the acquittal becomes an excuse for a family of thieves to try to steal $10 million worth of platinum from the factory where Mercer works. After all, the city’s attention is elsewhere.

But the hothead dad (Ray Liotta, in one of his final roles) likewise has trust issues with his sons (Scott Eastwood and Dylan Arnold). And when Mercer and Antoine seek refuge at the factory, the movie devolves into a tedious series of standoffs and tests of loyalty. The look is drab, the action is barely coherent, and Liotta deserved to go out with a better line than “I did the best that I could, son. I’m sorry it wasn’t enough.”

1992 Rated R. Gun violence and racial slurs. Running time: 1 hour 36 minutes. In theaters.