ROTTEN TOMATOES: Golden Tomato Awards: "Casino Royale," "The Queen" Best-Reviewed of 2006 Comments

Golden Tomato Awards: "Casino Royale," "The Queen" Best-Reviewed of 2006

by Binh Ngo | January 10, 2007

Summary

The 8th Annual Golden Tomato Awards were announced today, and "Casino Royale" and "The Queen" are the best reviewed wide and limited releases, respectively. The worst-reviewed movie was "Basic Instinct 2," Sharon Stone's attempt to re-capture past glory. Back to Article

(1-12 of 12 posts) | Reply

wiggins writes:
on Jan 10 2007 05:27 PM

hey binh, your headline says "casino royales" instead of "casino royale".

(Reply to this)

Binh Ngo writes:
on Jan 10 2007 05:31 PM

In reply to this comment (#852710)
Thanks for the heads up, Wiggins. Probably just me looking forward to the next one, I guess.

(Reply to this)

Mr. & Mrs. B writes:
on Jan 10 2007 05:52 PM

[b]Horror mishap[/b]
correct me if I am wrong but Slither has an 85 on the Tomatormeter and The Descent only 84 plus The Descent is much lower in the cream of the crop. Which would make the much better and more entertaining Slither the winner of the Golden tomatoe for 2006 horror.

(Reply to this)

loner_xtreme writes:
on Jan 10 2007 07:53 PM

In reply to this comment (#852712)
[b]hmmm....[/b]
do you think the number of critics were a factor in choosing the best? slither had 118 total and descent had 140. maybe including user ratings too? i loved both movies...so i would've been happy if either one won.

(Reply to this)

brian1121 writes:
on Jan 10 2007 09:56 PM

yeah, it has to have something to do with the number of reviews instead of the percentage because pan's is at 99%, the queen is at 98% and casino royale is at 95%. with it being weird with the percentages, they should say what their methodology is.

(Reply to this)

bolo_bao writes:
on Jan 10 2007 11:22 PM

[b]# of Reviews Factored In[/b]
From "How It Works" on the feature front page...

"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."

(Reply to this)

Vitamin M writes:
on Jan 11 2007 07:08 AM

AHHHHH! MATH!!!! Now that's scary.

(Reply to this)

brian1121 writes:
on Jan 11 2007 09:57 AM

That formula is no good unless it says somewhere what "m" is, as it should be a fixed value, right?

(Reply to this)

RT-Matt writes:
on Jan 11 2007 10:23 AM

In reply to this comment (#852717)
It's on the same GTA index page the formula above was taken from:

� A movie must have 50 or more rated reviews to be considered.

(Reply to this)

warsaw writes:
on Jan 11 2007 01:41 PM

wheres the best reviewed movie of the year...period..... award?!

PANS LABYRINTH DESERVES MORE RECOGNITION!

(Reply to this)

jehall writes:
on Jan 11 2007 07:58 PM

This system is questionalbe since Crossover is considered the 3rd worse film and Basic Instinct is crowned the worse. I'd rather see a film that went 10 for 130 in the review department rather than one that went 0 for 59.

(Reply to this)

unbreakable_samurai writes:
on Jan 12 2007 07:28 PM

How the hell isn't Zoom the worst reviewed film of the year?

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links