Not screened means?
The endless debate about whether or not G.I. JOE is going to suck has been raging for quite some time now. First, everyone thought the idea was terrible. Then people liked the trailer. Then there were rumors it tested horribly. Then early reviews started being positive. But the latest front of the war? G.I. JOE isn’t being screened for critics. Not en masse anyways.
Though a few have seen the film already (our own JimmyO included), the film is being kept secret from almost everyone else. The decision to keep critics in the dark is usually a move to squelch bad reviews, and Slashfilm came up with this handy chart (click to enlarge) to demonstrate just how true this is.
It’s the sixteen movies over the past twelve months that weren’t screened for critics, and their subsequent Tomatometer ratings. As you can see, only two of them breached 40%, CRANK: HIGH VOLTAGE and a Tyler Perry production. Everything else ranges from mediocre (UNDERWORLD 3, THE COLLECTOR) to the abysmal (THE LEGEND OF CHUN-LI, DISASTER MOVIE). But trying to be the exception to the rule, G.I. JOE is currently sitting at 91% and you have to wonder if this critic blackout was a bit of PR blunder.
|Extra Tidbit:||Really, CRANK 2 has a 62%? I mean, itís good at what it does, but for reference, 300 only managed a 60%.|