The Worst of the Worst Pictures

[Darren Dirt]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/features/special/2007/wotw/?todayonrt=1

Here's how the Worst of the Worst Pictures works:
   ? Each critic from our discrete list gets one vote, all weighted equally.
   ? A movie must have 40 or more rated reviews to be considered.
   ? Reviews without ratings are not counted toward the results.
   ? Because reviews are continually added, manually and otherwise, we have a cutoff date at which new reviews are not counted. The current cut off date is 3/16/2007.
   ? We use a weighted formula (Bayesian) to account for variation in the number of reviews per movie. The winners are determined by the rankings, designated as the "adjusted score," after applying said formula:

(r ? (r+m)) ? t + (m ? (r+m)) ? a, with "r" representing the number of rated reviews, "m" the minimum number of reviews needed for a movie to qualify, "t" the Tomatometer score, and "a" the average Tomatometer of all the qualifying movies

- - -

Have no fear, BFE and Catwoman and Glitter are all in there

A lot of "neverheardofit" titled in the bottom 60 or so... then it gets familiar. Painfully familiar. Oh, and slow clap recognition for Anthony "great movie crap movie as long as it pays well" Anderson. Multiple titles in the "top 10"


- - -

^ the above is "of all time".

If you are just interested in "2006" here ya go.

[Mags]

They have a cut off date for new movies, but they must have for old movies as well (Part of the 40 reviews I guess) because about 90% of the movies that came out in say the 70's would kill this list.

[Lazybones]

Wow, I managed to avoid all but two of those movies.